Comparative analysis of production – logistics systems that based on push and pull strategies

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31548/machenergy2019.03.069

Keywords:

production - logistics system, flexibility, inventories, concepts of flow management, efficiency criteria, system of indicators.

Abstract

A comparison is made of production and logistics strategies based on Push and Pull strategies and the advantages and disadvantages of their application to the enterprise are analyzed. This makes it possible to make a choice between flow management systems according to the market conditions and the characteristics of internal processes in the enterprise.
Was presented a mathematical model of choosing the construction`s principle of production-logistics system of the enterprise and practical recommendations for its implementation. A system of indicators characterizing the efficiency of the production and logistics system of the enterprise has been formed. The following indicators have been identified as key criteria influencing decision-making when choosing a production and logistics system: reliability of the supplier; availability of warehouse space; fluctuations in demand; productivity; quality of production.
The evaluation of the indicators of JSC "Milk Alliance" showed that at this point in time the production and logistics system of the enterprise most fully meets the requirements of the pushing concept of flow management. At the same time, the analysis provided an opportunity to identify the directions that the company needs to work on in order to further transition to the principles of the pulling concept, namely the need to improve interactions with existing suppliers and search for new suppliers. It is determined that the selected problems at the enterprise are important factors of construction of production and logistics systems on the principles of extraction. Therefore, they can be used as criteria that influence the decision on the choice of production and logistics concept.

References

Gunasekaran A., Patel, C., Tirtiroglu E. (2001). Performance measures and metrics in a supply chain environment. International Journal of Operations & Production Management. Vol. 21, №.1/2, 71-87.

https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570110358468

Hausman W. (2018). Financial Flows & Supply Chain Efficiency/Visa Commercial Solutions URL: http://www.visaasia.com/ap/sea/commercial/corporates/includes/ uploads/Supply_ Chain_Management_Visa.pdf.

Chan F. T., Qi H. J. (2003). An innovative performance measurement method for supply chain management. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal. Vol. 3. 209-223. https://doi.org/10.1108/13598540310484618

Leenders M. R., Johnson P. F., Flynn A. E., Fearon H. E. (2006). Purchasing and Supply Management, 13 th edition. McGraw-Hill. 768.

Figueira J., Greco S., Ehrgott M. (2005). Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys. NewYork: Springer. 1035.

https://doi.org/10.1007/b100605

Podinovski V. V. (1994). Criteria importance theory. Mathematical Social Sciences. Vol. 27. 237-252.

https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-4896(93)00737-F

Belton V., Stewart T. J. (2002). Multiple criteria decision analysis: an integrated approach. Boston: Cluwer. 372.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-1495-4

Branke J., Deb K., Miettinen K., Sownski R. (2008). Multiobjective optimization: interactive and evolutionary approaches. NY: Springer. 470.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-88908-3

Odnorog M. A. (2015). Investment support for completed projects at agricultural enterprises. Actual Problems of Economics. № 7. 180-185.

Saaty T. L. (1982). Decision Making for Leaders: The Analytic Hierarchy Process for Decisions in a Complex World. Belmont, Calif.: Lifetime Learning Publications, 291.

Drake, P. R. (1998). Using the Analytic Hierarchy Process in Engineering Education. International Journal of Engineering Education. Vol. 14 (3). 191-196.

Saaty T. L. (1996). The Hierarchon: A Dictionary of Hierarchies. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania : RWS Publications. 510.

Kendrick J. D., Saaty D. (2007). Use Analytic Hierarchy. Process For Project Selection. Six sigma forum magazine. 22-29. URL: http://engexecforum.com/ external%20files/Use%20Analytic%20Heirarch%20for%20Project%20Selection.pdf.

Fishburn P. (1968). Utility Theory. Management Science. Vol. 14, No. 5. 335-378. 15. Hobbs D. P. (2003). Lean Manufacturing Implementation: A Complete Execution Manual for Any Size Manufacturer J. Ross Publishing. 264. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.14.5.335

Downloads

Published

2020-01-27

Issue

No. 10(3) (2019)

Section

Статті

License

Relationship between right holders and users shall be governed by the terms of the license Creative Commons  Attribution – non-commercial – Distribution On Same Conditions 4.0 international (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0):https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/deed.uk

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  • Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  • Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  • Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).