Manufacturing Planning Systems
Use for Strategic Planning
David L. Olson, University of Nebraska-Lincoln,
dolson3@unl.edu
Bongsug (Kevin) Chae, Kansas State University
Chwen Sheu, Kansas State University
Manufacturing Planning Systems
• 1960s 1970s
– Continue to evolve
• 1990s – ERP
– Integrated systems
– Expensive
• MANY VARIANTS
• MPS specific systems can handle planning,
logistics functions
– Not integrated
– More affordable
GMRG Data
• Global Manufacturing Research Group
• Since 1985
– Four rounds to date
– Same survey applied to manufacturers in 17
countries
• Our dataset
– 964 responses
– 736 answered question concerning ERP system
used
Respondent Categories by Country
None
Albania
Australia
Austria
China
Croatia
Finland
Germany
Hungary
Ireland
Italy
Korea
Macedonia
Mexico
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
US
Small
8
4
1
1
11
9
3
8
3
2
5
17
7
8
55
94
2
16
15
26
9
38
23
12
4
45
In-house
BOPSE
15
4
4
19
3
20
6
15
7
13
2
10
9
3
17
8
1
6
31
15
11
6
8
10
10
9
29
4
15
Total
11
50
14
53
66
133
4
50
31
41
48
2
57
30
26
45
75
Are there significant differences across systems
in application to strategic planning?
Degree of use of manufacturing planning & control systems
for strategic planning (1-7 scale)
Avg
prob(diff) 1-tail
small
In-house
BOPSE
n
none
1.679 .001***
0.000*** 0.000***
28
small
2.861
0.000*** 0.000***
359
In-house
BOPSE
3.626
3.925
0.200
171
147
What types of systems are used for different
functions?
Degree of use of manufacturing planning & control systems
Category
Material
Planning
Inventory
Control
Labor
Planning
Shop Floor
Control
Cost
Planning
None
Manual
Desktop
Manual
Manual
Desktop,
Manual
Small
Modified
Commercial
Commercial
Commercial, Modified
Commercial,
Manual
commercial, Desktop
Manual
In-House
Custom
Custom
Desktop,
Custom
BOPSE
Commercial
Commercial
Commercial, Commercial, Commercial
Desktop
Desktop
Desktop,
Custom
Desktop,
Custom,
Commercial
Are there significant differences across systems
in assessment of operations benefits?
Degree of operations benefits obtained (1-7 scale)
Avg
prob(diff) 1-tail
small
In-house
BOPSE
N
None
4.172 0.000***
0.053*
0.037**
29
Small
4.662
0.027**
0.108
359
In-house
BOPSE
4.442
4.483
0.743
165
143
Are there significant differences across
systems in assessment of operations costs?
Degree of operations costs (1-7 scale – 7 low cost)
Avg
prob(diff) 1-tail
small
None
4.069 0.006***
Small
3.714
In-house
BOPSE
3.945
4.049
In-house
BOPSE
n
0.372
0.891
29
0.021**
0.003***
360
0.410
165
143
Are there significant differences across systems in
assessment of information systems data quality?
Satisfaction with IS data quality (1-7 scale)
Avg
prob(diff) 1-tail
small
In-house
None
3.429 0.003*** 0.004***
Small
5.051
In-house
BOPSE
5.023
5.323
0.914
BOPSE
N
0.001***
7
0.313
39
0.124
88
62
Conclusions
• There are a variety of ways to get MPS
• Vendor systems better for strategic planning
– In-house systems not significantly inferior
MPS use by Function
• Manual systems or desktop used by those
without formal MPS
• Desktop systems used by all
• Custom software more common in in-house
systems
• Major vendor systems move away from
manual, custom software, desktop
Operations Benefits & Costs
• Major vendor systems provide more benefits
– But not significant except against None category
• Small systems have cost disadvantage
– Perceived overall costs of Major Vendor systems
rated as reducing cost
Data Quality
• Major Vendor Systems rated best
– Small, In-House systems not significantly inferior