Evolution of Make-to-Stock (MTS) production environment management methods – research concept

• Authors: Ciechańska Olga
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The aim of the study is to present a concept for researching the production-for-inventory environment. The article focuses on the comparison of two production stockpiling environments, namely that of Make-to-Stock (MTS) and its developed version, Make-to-Availability (MTA). The article also presents research concepts related to the evolution of the MTS environment. The article presents the characteristics of production for inventory and for availability, while the matter of maturity models is also presented and a gap in the research is identified. The target and scope of the research is defined and the research program is discussed, and the research methods used at individual research stages have been identified. The status of the level of advancement of the research is presented,as are conclusions from previously undertaken research as well as further directions for this research, recommendations for the future, and the expected results of this work. The synthesis of the research will be to propose a maturity model for organisations functioning in the MTS / MTA environment.

Keywords

EN

Maturity model; Make-to-Stock; Make-to-availability; Production environments

• Publisher: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Akademii WSB
• Journal: Forum Scientiae Oeconomia
• Year: 2018
• Issue: Volume 6 (2018) Issue No. 2: Economic Growth, Innovations and Lobbying
• Pages: 21-32

Contributors

author

Ciechańska Olga

References

• Akinc, U., Jack, R. Meredith (2012), Make-to-forecast: Customisation with fast delivery, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 35(5): 728-750.
• Amaro, G., Hendry, L., Kingsman, B. (1999), Competitive advantage, customisation and a new taxonomy for non-make-to-stock companies, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 19(4): 349-371.
• Bozarth, C., Handfield, R.B. (2006), Introduction to operations and supply chain management, New Jersey: Pearson Education M.U.A.
• Christou, I.T. (2012), Quantitative methods in supply chain management. Models and Algorithms, London: Springer Verlag.
• Ciechańska, O. (2018), Model wytwarzania na dostępność jako nowe podejście do planowania produkcji, in: R. Knosala (Ed.), Innowacje w zarządzaniu i inżynierii produkcji, V.I. (pp. 410-419), Opole: Oficyna Wydawnicza Polskiego Towarzystwa Zarządzania Produkcją.
• Cox, J.F., Schleier, J.G. (2010), Theory of constraints handbook, New York: McGraw Hill.
• Hammer, M. (2007), The process audit, Harvard Business Review, 85(4): 111-113.
• Harrison, D.K., Petty, D.J. (2002), Systems for planning and control in manufacturing, Oxford: IIE Core Textbooks Series.
• Heizer, J., Render, B., (2011), Operations management, Boston: Pearson.
• Hill, T. (1994), Manufacturing strategy: Text and cases, Business One Irwin.
• Hopp, W.J., Spearman, M.L. (2000), Factory physics, Boston: Irvin-McGraw-Hill.
• Kosieradzka, A., Smagowicz, J. (2016), Analiza porównawcza modeli dojrzałości organizacji, in: M. Ćwiklicki, M. Jabłoński, S. Mazur (Eds.), Współczesne koncepcje zarządzania publicznego. Wyzwania modernizacyjne sektora publicznego (pp. 280-293), Kraków: Fundacja Gospodarki i Administracji Publicznej.
• Lockyer, K., Muhlemann, A., Oakland, J.S. (1992), Production and operation management, London: Pitman. Melnyk S.A., Denzler D.R. (1996), Operations management. A value-driven approach, Chicago: Irwin.
• Morikawa K., Takahashi K., Hirotani D. (2014), Make-to-stock policies for a multistage serial system under a make-to-order production environment, International Journal of Production Economics, 147: 30-37.
• Schragenheim, E., Dettmer, H.W., Patterson, J. (2009), Supply chain management at Warp Speed, Boca Raton: Taylor & Francis.
• Van Looy, A. (2014), A comparative study on a sample of business process maturity models, Business Process Maturity, Heidelberg-New York: Springer International Publishing.

Identifiers

DOI

10.23762/ fSo_vol 6no 2_18_2