Explain the implications of quality in a MRP system, a JIT system, and in Synchronous Manufacturing. Which system do you believe to be superior? Why? Jacobs and Chase (2011) state that an MRP system allows for rejects by building larger batch quantities than actually needed. They further state that a JIT system cannot tolerate poor quality because JIT success is based on balanced capacity and a defective part can shut down an entire JIT system (Jacobs & Chase, 2011, p. 695). A synchronous manufacturing system has excess capacity throughout the system, except for at the bottleneck and if a bad part is produced upstream of the bottleneck, only that part is lost (Jacobs & Chase, 2011, p. 695). I believe an MRP system would be suitable for the production of simple parts or assemblies as long as the cost of rejected parts is not too high. This really applies to any system, but the rejection of simple parts won’t cost as much as rejecting complex assemblies. JIT systems and synchronous manufacturing systems are similar in the fact that they both try to reduce inventory. JIT systems do this by pushing the burden of inventory onto the supplier or a third party logistics provider. However, synchronous manufacturing appears more flexible and able to absorb fluctuations when compared to the tightly strung JIT operations seen in the automotive industry.
Goldratt, E., & Cox, J. (2004). The goal: a process of ongoing improvement (3rd ed). Great Barrington, MA: North River Press.
Jacobs, F. R., & Chase, R. B. (2011). Constraint management. In Operations and supply chain management (13th ed., pp. 680-715). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document