the american version of lean production has been called mass production.
the american version of lean production has been called mass production.
the american version of lean production has been called?
mass production
getting work to flow reliably and predictably on a construction site requires the impeccable alignment of the entire supply chain responsible for constructed facilities such that value is maximized and waste is minimized. with such a broad scope, it is fair to say that tools found in lean manufacturing and lean production, as practiced by toyota and others, have been adapted to be used in the fulfillment of lean construction principles. tqm, spc, six-sigma, have all found their way into lean construction. similarly, tools and methods found in other areas, such as in social science and business, are used where they are applicable. the tools and methods in construction management, such as cpm and work breakdown structure, etc., are also utilized in lean construction implementations. the three unique tools and methods that were specifically conceived for lean construction are the last planner system, target value design, and the lean project delivery system.
lean construction
the downside of this method is that it may not be suited for a more complex and repetitive production because it requires perfect contention of the wip (raw materials and assemblies) on the shop floor: the materials issued to a production order shouldn't interfere with another production order or the next production order of the same kind. this can be done only if all work-steps required to complete the production order are limited more or less to a single work-place. that is why this kind of approach can be implemented for complex products only by using the push strategy. push strategy means that a complex finished product is divided into many smaller assemblies and even assemblies may contain smaller assemblies and so on. all these assemblies will receive their own production order. these production orders are usually created automatically by the mrp\erp - system. the erp system uses manufacturing resource planning (mrp) for the planning of production orders. usually only the production planning for the finished product is done manually by the production planner, the assemblies are planned automatically based on backward scheduling. this is especially useful if the assemblies are being produced in another production line, workshop or plant. the downside of mrp and push strategy is that it usually leads to larger stocks in the supply chain. that is why push is regarded as the opposite of lean production because lean production involves the pull strategy which means that any part should only be produced if there is a certain demand for it and therefore wip will be small. push strategy is when mrp is used also to schedule production orders for semi-finished products (assemblies) based on the forecasted demand of the finished product. these assemblies are put into stores without any reference to a certain production order of the finished product. the finished product may not even have had production orders released at the time the assembly was delivered to the store. that is why using mrp to schedule the execution of production orders is by definition a push system because releases are made according to a master production schedule without regard to system status. hence, no "a priori" wip limit exists. however mrp can be designed in such a way that it has an explicit wip constraint. that means that assemblies are not produced further if a certain level of inventory is reached. mrp with a wip constraint can be regarded as a pull system. however, even if a wip constraint is implemented, push-strategy generally means that the time, needed from the first operation or assembly until the finished good is obtained, is much longer as opposed to pull-strategy. this is due to the lead-times needed for each assembly and can be analyzed by using a technique called value stream mapping. there is usually also much more handling: putting the assemblies into the stores, picking the assemblies from stores to the next production step (order) which uses the assembly to make another assembly or finished product. in reality, most firms use both strategies. for example: you could use mrp (push) without wip constraint to schedule assemblies that are produced in another workshop, plant or external supplier and kanban (pull) in your own plant. you can also use kanban to schedule the assemblies in another workshop or plant, but it is usually not done when these assemblies are produced on large machines because with mrp the demand of several days can be comprised in bigger lot sizes of production orders of similar type in such a way that the workshops own scheduling system (mes) is then able to use the available machine-capacity better by bringing the production orders into an optimal sequence using suitable algorithms. this is usually the case when the machines are expensive, their number is relatively small and they have big output-capacities and setup time is expensive. implementing kanban in such a case would require to use a bigger number of smaller\cheaper machines, dedicated to certain production lines, in order to react more flexibly to the demand. another requirement would be that the frequency of transports from\to that plant to be higher and the distance to that plant to be relatively small. these requirements however, cannot be accomplished in each case. on the other side, the workshop (supplier) which manufactures the assemblies may very well use a push strategy or a pull-strategy for delivering the needed materials to each of its own machines.
backflush accounting