Abstract

This paper aims at providing general introduction about Just in Time Sequencing system
mainly focus on application of JIT Sequencing in production system. The Just in time sequencing
problem in mixed model production systems is dealt. The main objective of JITPS is to minimize
the cost related with inventory. JIT production system identifies the hidden problems in the value
chain and reduces the production waste of the system while increasing the throughout (SalesRaw Material Cost). Even though the JIT system seems to be interesting and less complicated it
requires lot of coordination with supply chain to avoid delays in the production schedule. This
paper discusses in depth the implementation of JIT production and manufacturing. The
objectives are twofold. The first objective is to acquaint the reader with the overall JIT concept
and the factors necessary for its implementation; the concepts presented here represent the ideal
principles and methods of implementation. The primary objective of JIT is to provide high level
of quality in production and manufacturing system. JITPS is a continuous improvement
productivity triad firstly applied in low demands and limited resources have now become widely
accepted because of its character tics like low working progress (WIP) inventory and pull
system. Reduction of cost due to reduction of inventory in JITPS, manufacture has adopted this
in broad philosophy. This paper develops a model integrating feedback, goal-setting, group
cohesiveness, task norms, and peer pressure to predict how individual behavior may adjust to
alleviate production interruptions. In doing so, we integrate previous research on the
development of task norms. Findings suggest that induce individual and group responses that
cause behavioral changes that mitigate production interruptions.

Keywords
Kanban, Production rate variation, Inventory, Heuristics, Apportionment, Mixed-model assembly
line, Logistics Business, Supply Chain

Acknowledgement
We are indebted to Prof. Dr. G.B.Thapa for his continuous inspiration and support in our
study. We would like to thanks to the department of Science and Humanities, Pulchowk Campus
for providing and preparing the research worth subjects to study. We also like to thanks my
colleagues for their valuable assists and co-operation during preparation of research report. In
the future also we hope similar types of co-operation and help from the friends and teachers. The
errors, mistakes and comments are highly welcomed so that we can increase the level of
impropveness in future.

Contents
3

1.

INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................6
1.1

2.

Just in Time and Quality...................................................................................................7

STATEMENT OF JIT SEQUENCING PROBLEM................................................................8

2.1

Overproduction.................................................................................................................8

2.2

Waiting..............................................................................................................................8

2.3

Transportation...................................................................................................................8

2.4

Non-Value-Added Processing...........................................................................................9

2.5

Excess Inventory...............................................................................................................9

2.6

Defects..............................................................................................................................9

2.7

Excess Motion...................................................................................................................9

2.8

Underutilized People.........................................................................................................9

3.

LITERATURE REVIEW.........................................................................................................9
3.1

Daily Schedule Adherence:.............................................................................................11

3.2

Equipment layout:...........................................................................................................11

3.3

JIT Delivery by Suppliers:..............................................................................................11

3.4

JIT Link with Customers:................................................................................................11

3.5

Kanban:...........................................................................................................................11

3.6

Setup Time Reduction:....................................................................................................11

4.

MATHEMATICAL MODELS OF THE PROBLEMS..........................................................11

5.

Multi-Level Product Sequencing Problem.............................................................................12

6.

Single-Level Sequencing Problems........................................................................................13

7.

SOME JIT SEQUENCING APPROACHES.........................................................................14

7.1

Heuristic Frontiers...........................................................................................................14

8.

The Effects of JIT on the Development of Productivity Norms.............................................16

9.

Differences between Low- and High-Inventory Systems: Information and Interdependence

16

10.

Factors Hindering JIT Application.....................................................................................17

10.1

Supplier Factors:.............................................................................................................17

10.2

Personnel Factors:...........................................................................................................18

10.3

Product Factors:..............................................................................................................19

10.4

Production Factors:.........................................................................................................19
4

11.

Manufacturing process in supply chain..............................................................................20

12.

CONCLUSION...................................................................................................................22

REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................23

1. INTRODUCTION
5

Just in time sequencing (JIT) is a well-recognized socio-industrial problem which aims to

minimize the maximum and total deviation between the actual and ideal productions. Just-inTime (JIT) means making only what is needed, when it is needed, and in the amount
needed.(Thapa, Gyan Bahadur; Silvestrov Sergei;, 2015)Just in time (JIT) sequencing of a
product in mixed model production systems is the promising research all over the world.
Industry and organization have applied JIT sequencing to optimize production and other
operational activities. JIT production systems (JITPS) have been distinctive technology because
of low work-in-progress (WIP) inventory and low finished goods inventory. JITPS is a pull
system where products are assembled just before they are sold, subassemblies are made just
before the products are assembled and the components are fabricated just before the subassemblies are made. As a consequence, WIP inventory and production lead time are reduced.
Reduction of inventory would reduce the cost associated with inventory ranging from the
warehouse itself (lease or mortgage, utilities and property taxes), the labor costs involved with
managing the inventory receiving, storing, picking and transporting. Moreover, equipment
and systems needed to support these processes and mostly the opportunity cost of money which
is tied up in inventory instead being used immediately. JITPS demands for continuous
improvement in its three mutually supportive components: people involvement, total quality
control and JIT flow; jointly called productivity triad. Any unnecessary delays and inventories
are considered as waste and WIP inventory is kept as minimum as possible. JITPS aims to
achieve a smooth and synchronized flow of small lots of material at a uniform rate instead of
producing one product for long time and then switching to next product Small lots of production
refers to the reduction of batch sizes to the smallest lot possible. JITPS uses a technique called
mixed-model assembly where a mix of the models is assembled (produced) each day in short
repetitive sequence; each model is frequently repeated in proportion to its relative demand.
(Abdallah & Matsui, 2007)JITPS can be the best solution to burgeoning industry to manage
limited resources, and to produce small lot product meeting the demand of various consumer
within specified time horizon.
(Horngren & Foster, 1987) Identified four cardinal objectives of JIT as:
The elimination of all activities that do not add value to product or service.
A commitment to a high level of quality.
A commitment to continuous improvement in the efficiency of an activity and
An emphasis on simplification and increased visibility to identify activities that do not add
value.

1.1Just in Time and Quality

6

The single most substantial ingredient of JIT is quality. It is impossible for JIT to be
successful until the company has drastically improved its attitude toward quality. In the language
of the (Abdallah & Matsui, 2007), quality is a race with no finish line." The ultimate aspiration
is to satisfy all customers (internal and external) all the time. The Wallace Company, a past
winner of the Baldrige Award, installed a buzzer on the shop floor that sounded anytime a
customer called their customer service hot line. Instantly all workers knew they had a dissatisfied customer. Can you imagine installing such a device in a traditional manufacturing
company?
Analogous to the familiar chicken or the egg question, it is often asked, Which comes
first, quality or JIT? Quality is a two way street; JIT is impossible without quality, but quality is
directly enhanced by JIT. Although quality is possible without JIT, it requires the use of wasteful
procedures such as inspection and rework. JIT proposes the idea of do it right the first time
rather than inspecting in quality. In a JIT environment, each internal customer (the next operator
down the line) must be completely satisfied by the previous operation. Any problems in quality
are resolved immediately, rather than allowing them to contaminate the system further.
To produce quality you must install quality. Quality must evolve from both sides at the same
time. To allow operators to satisfy their internal customers, quality procedures, materials,
machines, and mindset must be present. JIT is not possible without quality, but JIT is a means by
which quality is achieved.

Fig.2. Production level

2. STATEMENT OF JIT SEQUENCING PROBLEM

Earlier, assembly lines were developed for cost efficient mass production of single
standardized product. Requirements of production systems to meet various product demand lead
to the very first application of JTTPS at Ford production system (Ford motor company in 1903).
However, the present idea of the system is developed and perfected by (Oyama, 1991), who is
renowned as father of JTTPS, while working in Toyota motor company around 1970s.Ohno
realized American motor companies were more than nine time ahead of automobile industry of
Japan and made a comment to catch up the gap within three years. (Oyama, 1991) Not only
molded automobile industry of Japan but also created a system that is enduring and living model
for efficient manufacturing the whole world over. (Oyama, 1991) Identified eight wastes that
account for up to 95% of all costs in traditional manufacturing:
2.1 Overproduction: Producing more than a customer needs, incurs heavy warehousing,
equipment and labor costs.
2.2 Waiting: Any machine or human in a wait state, no matter what they are waiting for, represents
lost money and opportunity.
2.3 Transportation: Materials that are transported from the supplier to any location (e.g.
warehouse) other than the point-of-use; creates unnecessary transportation costs in time and
money.

8
Fig.2. Production Level

2.4 Non-Value-Added Processing: Quality control (traditional processes of inspecting completed

products and fixing defects after production is complete) is unnecessary in a manufacturing.
2.5 Excess Inventory: Carrying more inventories than is needed, from raw materials to finished
goods, incurs expensive warehouse space and labor.
2.6 Defects: Product defects incur labor, space, equipment, and time costs.
2.7 Excess Motion: Incurring more motion than is necessary to carry out a task wastes time and
labor.
2.8 Underutilized People: Failure to leverage the skills, creativity, time and other attributes of
people results in wasted opportunities for organizational, team and individual efficiency
improvements.
Low demands, limited space and resources in Japan resulted JITPS within Toyota. Toyota
production system (TPS) consists of two pillars: JIT and automation. These two pillars helped
TPS to achieve stable production system by providing the highest quality, lowest cost and
shortest lead time .TPS main bases were standardized work, smoothing production schedule by
mixedmodel sequencing and change for better. The JITPS is a management philosophy based
on the planned elimination of all wastages, continuous improvement of productivity and
reduction of inventories in all level which is performed by producing only the necessary amount
of necessary products in perfect quality at right place and time. The main target is to satisfy
consumers demand of different products without keeping large inventories and large shortage of
products using limited resources in a optimal way.

3. LITERATURE REVIEW
After Toyota's outstanding success with TPS in meeting and exceeding American
manufacturing production at significantly lower costs, manufacturers around the globe rapidly
adopted and emulated TPS-based practices throughout the 1980s, 1990s and beyond. A 2006
survey of US manufacturers by Industry Week and the Manufacturing Performance Institute for
the 2006 Census of Manufacturers showed that just-in-time supplier deliveries were at the top of
the list of most commonly used methods for managing inventories, with over 43% of
respondents reporting its use in their operations. JIT has enabled a different world. Today's
supply chain increasingly moves small amounts of product at a time, delivered directly onto the
factory floor or retail shelves, rather than into warehouses. Manufacturing has been
revolutionized with investments that focus on improved flexibility in volume, product and
delivery; increased production speed, and; waste reduction. All this has worked to provide faster
product to market rates at reduced cost. In JIT sequencing, products completed early are held as
inventory till their due date while product completed after their due date may cause shortage of
product. So, an ideal schedule is one in which all products are finished exactly on their due date.
The concept of elimination of both earliness and tardiness raised line of research in scheduling
9

theory. The mixed-model JIT sequencing is determination of production sequence of different

models of the same product produced on the assembly line where product are assumed to have
equal number and mix of parts. The mixed-model JIT sequencing is formulated as non-linear
integer programming problem which seeks to minimize the sum of squared deviations between
average and cumulative quantity of products by means of nearest integer point algorithm for
optimality is presented. (Khashouie, 2003) well-studied this level schedule program, referring as
production rate variation (PRV). (Horngren & Foster, 1987)proposed an assignment formulation
for sum deviation problem to determine an optimum solution at a smaller computational cost and
also gave some properties that related problem of each of products considered separately.
The natural similarity between JIT PRV problem and the single machine scheduling problem
is used to propose a heuristic for PRV problem. This heuristic reveals that an earliest due date
(EDD) sequence minimizes the sum of squared deviation between the ideal time and actual time
of their actual production. (Sriparavastu & Gupta, 1997)proposed deviation for the two products
aiming to minimize variation of product rate from product to products. The Mixed-model
assembly line (MMAL) is one where a variety of different items are assembled or processed at
different stations in small size and batches. Such assembly line serves in flexible manufacturing
system (FMS) to meet diverse demands of customers. Most FMS adopt JIT philosophy in their
effort to minimize inventory. Thus, MMAL finds good applications in JITPS. The Toyota
production system (TPS) used JIT sequencing to distribute production volumes and mix of
models as evenly as possible over the production sequences. JIT sequencing process has become
a credible concept to balance the two sequencing goals: usage goal and loading goal. Usage goal
maintains a constant rate of usage of all items in the production sequence while, loading goal
smoothest the workload on final assembly process by reducing the chance of production delays
and stoppages. JIT sequencing is used to balance workloads throughout JIT supply chains
intended for low-volume highmix family of products. The purpose of optimal solution is to
keep the actual production level and the desired production level as close to each other as
possible all the time.
Output rate variation (ORV) is referred as extension of single- level problem into multilevel. Most discrete manufacturing systems are multi-level in nature, characterized by condition
where several parts are used to produce a particular part at higher level, terminates giving the
final product with direct consumer utility. The sequence of products on the final assembly line
impacts greatly on inventory level of parts used directly for assembly and the other parts in the
system. Recently problem of finding of appropriate product sequence is attracting a lot of
attention of researchers. ORV is proved NP-hard, even in special cases. However, the ORV
problem with pegging assumption reduces the problem into the weighted PRV problem. Pegged
multilevel problem may be solved to optimum in time which is polynomial in the total product
demand and the weighted factors.
Based on our literature review, JIT should be focus on the following dimensions of JIT:
10

3.1 Daily Schedule Adherence: Measures whether there is time allotted for meeting
each days schedule including catching up after stoppages for quality considerations
or machine breakdown.
3.2 Equipment layout: Measures use of manufacturing cells, elimination of forklifts and
long conveyers, and use of smaller equipment designed for flexible floor layout, all
associated with JIT.
3.3 JIT Delivery by Suppliers: Measures whether vendors have been integrated into
production in terms of using kanban containers, making frequent (or just-in-time)
delivery and quality certification.
3.4 JIT Link with Customers: Measures whether the plant has applied the JIT delivery
concept and the pull concept in the operational link with its customers.
3.5 Kanban: Measures whether or not the plant has implemented the physical elements
of kanban/pull system.
3.6 Setup Time Reduction: Setup Times/Lot Size Reduction measures whether the plant
is taking measures to reduce setup times and lower lot sizes in order to facilitate JIT.

4. MATHEMATICAL MODELS OF THE PROBLEMS

Suppose, there are n products to be produced with integer demands d 1, d2, d3,
n

D
.dn,. Such that;
i=1

in given time. The time required to produce one unit of any

product is assumed to be same and time for switching from one product to another is assumed as
negligible. It can be supposed that it takes one unit of time to produce one unit of product and
thus, time horizon equal to D time units. If ideal production rate (ri) = (di/D) for type i, such that

ri=1
i=1

The scheduling goal for assembly line is to maintain the total cumulative production of
product i to the total production as close to ri as possible. This means exactly Kri units of product
i should be produced in the first k periods (k=1,2,.D), which is the ideal production.
Let Xik; i=1, 2,.n; k=1,2,.D, be the actual cumulative production of product i in time
period 1 through k. For a convex symmetric penalty function F i; i=1, 2,.n with minimum
Fi(0)=0; the maximum deviation and the sum deviation just-in-time sequencing problems are
formulated as follows:Zmax =min max F(Xik-Kri)
(3.1)

11

Z min =min Fi (XijKri )

(3.2)

Subject to

X =k,k = 1,2,..D

(3.3)

ik

i=1
Xi (k-1)=<Xik, i= 1,2,..n; k= 1,2,D
XiD =di;i= 1,2,.n

(3.4)
(3.5)

X is a non-negative integer

(3.6)

The above formulation (3.1) to (3.6) is an integer programming problem with cardinality,
mono tonicity, and integrality as constraints. The constraint (3.3) ensures that exactly k units are
scheduled in periods 1 through k, whereas the constraint (3.4) guarantees that the total
production of every product k is a non-decreasing function called monotone condition. The
constraint (3.5) ensures that production requirements are met for each product (satisfied by
optimal solution) and the constraint (3.6) is integrality constraint. The optimization problem is to
find the sequence z = s1, s2,.sn that minimizes one of the objective functions(3.1)
or (3.2) under the constraints (3.3)to (3.6). Hereafter, we use MDJIT and SDJIT for maximum
deviation and sum deviation JIT sequencing objectives respectively. Several scientists may have
studied these problems via different angles with little-varied objective functions, which are
discussed in later section.

5. Multi-Level Product Sequencing Problem

Multi-level JITSP consists of L production levels such that l =1, 2., L with the first
product level 1. The number of different part types and the demand of item I in level l are
denoted by ni and dil respectively, i= 1, 2, , . ni. The number of total units of item I at level l
required to produce one unit of the product p is denoted by tilp such that dil = nip-1tilp dis the
dependent demand for item I at level l determined by the final product demands d pl= 1,2.ni and
l=1,2,3..L. Note that tilp=1if i= p and 0 if otherwise. Finally, Di= nii-1dildenotes the total
demand at level l , and the ratio ril=dil/ Dl gives the demand rate for item I of level l such that nii1ril=1 at each level l =1,2,_,L. The production schedule at level 1consists of 1 D stage in total and
at each stage a single unit of an end-product cans be processed. An item is at stage 1 k , k = 1,_,
12

D , if k units of product is produced at level 1 and there will be k complete units of products pat
level 1 during the first k time units.
Let Xilk be the necessary quantity of item I produced at level l during the time units 1
through k and yik= nii-1Xilkbe the cumulative quantity of item I produced at level l during the
same time units such that yik= nii-1Xilk =k. Due to pull nature of JITPS, particular combination
ofthe highest level products produced during k time units determines the necessary cumulative
production at every other level. Thus, the required cumulative production for item I at level l
with l 2 through k time units is given by Xik= nip=1tilpXplk.For a convex penalty function Fi, i=
1, 2,_, n with minimum 0 at 0, the maximum deviation and the sum deviation multilevel JITSPs
are mathematically formulated to minimize the objectives max Z and sum Z.

The particular cases of the min-max objective and the min-sum objective are studied in
terms of absolute and squared deviations, and the weighted cases with NP-hard results are also
discussed. (Thapa, 2012) The objective aims to find a smooth schedule in every time period for
every output. It is the basic concept underlying Toyota's sequencing algorithm. The objective
seeks optimal schedules that may have relatively large deviation in a single period or for a
certain output while having the lowest possible total deviation. This problem is NP-hard in
general. However some heuristics; the dynamic programming and pegging assumption exist for
heuristic and suboptimal solutions.

6. Single-Level Sequencing Problems

Suppose there are n products to be produced within the specified time horizon with the
integer demands d1,d2 dn such that ni=1 di=D. If ri=di/D is the ideal production rate for the
parts of type I such that ni=1 ri=1, then the scheduling goal for the assembly line is to maintain
the total cumulative production of product i to the total production as close to i r as possible.
This means exactly ikr units of product I should be produced in the first k time period, which is
the ideal production where k = 1.

Let xik,i=1,2, ,..n; k=1, 2,..,D, be the actual cumulative production of product I in the
time period 1 through k. For a convex symmetric penalty function Fi ,i, =1, 2,,n with minimum
13

Fi(0) = 0the maximum deviation and the sum deviation JITSPs are formulated to minimize max
F and sum F .

7. SOME JIT SEQUENCING APPROACHES

7.1Heuristic Frontiers
Heuristics are approximate techniques which tend to increase the probability of solving
optimization problems. In other words, the heuristic approaches provide comparatively good
solutions, but not necessarily complete. Usually, heuristic algorithms are used for problems
which are difficult to solve. Some of mixed model heuristics are developed by academic research
scientists, while others are result of practical applications. (Brown & Mitchell, 1991) developed
two greedy heuristic at Toyota referred as goal chasing methods: GCM I and GCM II. These
GCMs were designed with product level and sub-assembly constructed a sequence of one
product at a time. On comparing on the basis of maintaining constant usage of component parts
GCM I performed better than GCM II. These heuristic has been found to yield good results in
Toyota Company. Hyundais heuristic (HH) used an alternative way, which approach
approximate the result given by GCM I and reduced the steps of computation. (Duglapa &
Bragg, 1998) concluded that the reduction in computational effort related to HH may be
significant in situation similar to automobile where many options and choices are available for
final production configurations. GCM I was further advanced to extend GCM to consider all
levels in a multi-level production system and another polynomial heuristic was introduced to
reduce the myopic nature of previous heuristic and an exact procedure based on the bounded
dynamic programming was developed.
(Miltenberg, et al., 1990) suggested the squared and absolute SDJIT sequencing objectives to be
minimized as:

n D
Square deviation: Fx(x) = (Xik-Kri)2
14

r=1 k=1
n D
Absolute deviation: Fa(x)=

abs(Xik-Kri)
r=1 k=1

(Miltenberg, et al., 1990) proposed three algorithms and two heuristic to solve problem.
The First algorithm finds the nearest integer point to X ik. Second algorithm solves squared
deviation problem using first algorithm tests the feasibility of the schedule. Third algorithm
determines the possibility of schedule. First heuristic is used with third algorithm to calculate an
entire schedule d or mixed model JIT production system considering the production rates, not the
parts usage rate. But, it did not consider the effect of its current decision on the variation in the
future stages. (Miltenberg, et al., 1990) further developed two-stage second heuristic with the
complexity (n2D) for each stage, which together with third algorithm approximates the
variability over the two stages and schedules to keep variability as small as possible.
A good heuristic is a simple heuristic with good average performance and reasonable
time complexity. From the analysis it is shown that (Miltenberg, et al., 1990) second heuristic
with third algorithm is of highest quality with good average performance and reasonable time
complexity. But, due to large size of products n and their unit D, the impression of (Miltenberg,
et al., 1990)s heuristic is not so effective. The relative performance of mixed-model sequencing
heuristic can be examined on the basis of ability to develop a sequence for final assembly
smoothing the rate of use of each component part feeding the assembly line.

Earliest Due Date Rule

(Brown & Mitchell, 1991)proposed mini-sum squared sequencing objective
n D
F(y) = (yik-tik)

(4.3)

i=1 k=1
to be minimized and developed a pseudo polynomial heuristic with complexity O(nD), where tik
is idea time, Yik is needed time of production of each product with an efficient earliest due date
rule(EDD) rule. (Yasin & Wafa, 1996)reduced the problem into single-machine scheduling with
due date tik and yielded better solutions and considered faster than (Miltenberg, et al., 1990)s
heuristic. (Brown & Mitchell, 1991)gave a simple two-stage algorithm and complexity (nD)
15

which minimizes the variation of two stages and produces a good solution. (Miltenberg, et al.,
1990) third algorithm with second heuristic and Ding and Chengs heuristic work in sequential
manner make use of special structure of the PRV problem. Sumichrast et al. constructed the time
spread (TS) heuristic employing similar procedure as GCM I with function in which time
required to assemble products are applied. Later there was developed a local search heuristic
providing near optimal sequence for realistic-size problems in a reasonable time. The problem
with bi-creation objective function of part usage deals with maximization of feasibility and
minimization of setup time simultaneously. Similarly, the extensive study of objective for parts
usage and workload using heuristic can be calculated.

8. The Effects of JIT on the Development of Productivity Norms

One technique commonly used to improve manufacturing competitiveness is the
reduction of inventory within the manufacturing process, often referred to as just-in-time
manufacturing or JIT. Current Operations Research (OR) models suggest that reductions in
inventory lower inventory costs, but also increase interference within the manufacturing line.
This interference causes idle time which reduces line efficiency and productivity. Yet many firms
have experienced increases in profit when changing to low-inventory systems. Proponents of JIT
argue that this apparent contradiction is explained by savings elsewhere in the system (e.g., lower
holding or obsolescence costs) and improvements in production quality and response time.

9. Differences between Low- and High-Inventory Systems: Information

and Interdependence
Low-inventory systems intrinsically provide more task-related information to workers
than high-inventory systems. A change from two to three items in a buffer can be noticed with a
glance while it takes more effort to notice a change from 2000 to 2001 items. Since JIT uses
small inventories, usually placed on a marked grid or rack, it is easy to notice small changes in
quantity. These changes provide immediate information on the worker's relative speed. If the
inventory in the output buffer goes up, the worker is processing faster than the downstream
worker. If it goes down (s) he is slower. Likewise, inventory in the input buffer signals
differences in speed with previous (upstream) workers. We have already discussed how this
information can lead to greater management control. However, its use is not restricted to
management one. It is available to anyone who can see the buffer, most notably, the workers on
the line. The information available with low inventory has multiple implications. First, it is
evaluative data -- the worker is processing items faster or slower than some standard. Second, it
16

allows role comparisons -- the worker is processing faster or slower than a particular coworker.
Third it has a direct interpersonal consequence -- a worker's processing speed may cause a coworker to be idle (i.e., blocked or starved). Due to these multiples implications we expect the
information from JIT operations to have a greater impact than evaluative information alone.
Another fundamental difference between low- and high-inventory situations is the
interdependence within work groups in JIT (Brown & Mitchell, 1991). With high inventory,
people work essentially as individuals, independent of each other. The very reason for having
inventory buffers between machines is to isolate the workstations. Due to strong
interdependence, the situation is much different with low inventory. In any serial system the
maximum work pace of the group is the work pace of the slowest individual, but with low
inventory the time frame in which this is observed is much shorter, minutes or hours instead of
days or weeks. Anyone working faster will be quickly blocked or starved. Also, with much less
inventory, the work space becomes less cluttered and it is easier to see the entire work process.
We propose to use behavioral theory to explore how these fundamental differences of
information and interdependence can affect worker behavior in low-inventory manufacturing.

10.Factors Hindering JIT Application

The factors hindering JIT application will be analyzed in terms of 5 categories, namely
supplier factors, personnel factors, product factors, production factors and others.

10.1 Supplier Factors: The lack of control of timing of overseas supplies shipment is the most
serious problem faced by both JIT and non- JIT companies. The second most important
hindrance is the lack of reliable suppliers (in terms of quantity and cost). Fifty-six percent of
the JIT respondents indicated that this is a serious problem faced by their companies because if
a supplier delivers a bad batch, the whole production line will have to stop. A JIT applicant
indicated that a solution lies in implementing a stricter qualification for suppliers. Another
solution is to work closely with suppliers by supporting them to build up their quality and
responsiveness and this can be justified by having a long-term relationship with them. A fair
price must also be provided so that suppliers are motivated to enhance their quality and
delivery times. In addition, companies may resort to having outgoing quality inspection at the
suppliers place rather than have the incoming quality inspection so that poor quality products
may be detected and corrected earlier. Twenty-five percent of JIT and 39% of non-JIT
respondents noted that the unpredictability of supply quantity for each shipment creates a
problem for their implementation of a JITS. There is the need to ensure that the quantity
supplies are exactly what the company has ordered in order for the production line to run
smoothly.
17

Fig.3. JIT sequence in delivery

Following this line of argument, JIT companies were expected to place importance on
this factor since they do not hold or do not hold sufficiently large buffer inventors in their stores.
Any shortages in supplies shipped may cause inventory shortages in the production line and there
would be delays in the delivery of goods to the customers. However, only 25% of the JIT
respondents consider this factor to be hindrance to them. One reason as mentioned earlier, is that
companies employing JIT adopts JIT on a partial basis. Another reason lies in the nature of their
required materials. For instance, if the materials required take little time to manufacture, or are
very specialized or complex, suppliers would be able to supply them more readily in the
quantities requested. Lastly the supplies problem is felt less with more efficient materials
planning by the JIT companies or with better ability to predict possible shipment quantities they
can adjust their operations accordingly. The survey indicated that perish ability and minimum lot
size of supplies is not a major problem. Only about 20% of the respondents from both JIT and
non- JIT companies cited this as a problem. One explanation is that the remaining80% of each
respondent group uses supplies that are not perishable, or come in a variety of lot sizes. Another
explanation is that even if perishable supplies are used, the companies have established some
form of production plan that could fully utilize the materials once the pack is opened.

10.2 Personnel Factors: The lack of commitment by management is the most serious factor. The
successful implementation of a JITPS requires amongst others, redesigning the factory layout
and educating the employees on the concept of value-adding activities (Taakeuchi1981;
Wheeler 1988) which will require the use of the companys scarce resources. As such top
management must not only initiate the process of change (Sage 1984) but must also be fully
committed to such changes. The lack of commitment and experience by management may be
attributed to relative newness of the JIT concept and this might be a reason why few companies
have implemented JIT. Steps must therefore be taken to educate top Management on the
benefits of JIT and ways to successfully implement JIT. Inter-departmental conflict of interest is
the second most important factor indicated by 38% of JIT and 33% of the non- JIT respondents.
This means that coordination among departments is a must before JIT can be implemented.
18

Team effort is of utmost importance. To reduce inter-departmental conflicts one JIT applicant
suggested a restructuring of the organization so that lines of communications, cooperation and
responsibility can be clearly drawn out. Twenty-five percent of the JIT companies found
resistance to change by workers a problem as compared with only 11% of the non- JIT
respondents. The low percentage of 25% stems from the local culture which emphasizes
teamwork and/or the high level of education of the workers. Further with a greater emphasis on
education and upgrading of skills, the current generation is probably better educated and skilled
as compared with the older generation. The differential in response may point to non- JIT
companies lack of knowledge of how worker resistance can act as a hindrance to the
implementation of JIT. The lack of commitment and knowledge by workers has been cited as
hindrances to JIT application. If workers are able to understand the benefits of implementing
JIT, they would be more than glad to accept the change. However, workers may not want to see
an improvement in productivity, if it means more work for them without any accompanying
benefit.

10.3 Product Factors: For the two factors of high product mix and irregularity of demand,
responses-from the JIT and non- JIT companies are controversial. Seventy-five percent of the
respondents of the JIT group considered product mix as a more serious problem, whilst 89% of
the non- JIT respondents indicated that irregularity of demand is a more important factor to
overcome the product mix problem, one JIT applicant resorted to the standardization of parts so
that the standard part could be used interchangeably between various products. Another solution
was to adopt Flexible Manufacturing Systems (FMS) so that a greater variety of products can be
produced. Solving the problem of the irregularity of demand is more difficult, as one way to
overcome this is to keep finished goods inventory which runs contrary to JIT.

10.4 Production Factors: A low production volume is the most commonly quoted problem by both
the JIT (56%) and non- JIT (61%) respondents as indicated by the comparative chart of
production factors by one applicant is to adopt EMS and cellular manufacturing systems which
allows for a shorter production schedule. The responses between JIT and non- JIT groups
regarding a batch-oriented production process are different. The JIT companies reckon the
redesigning of factory layout as a more formidable problem than having a batch-oriented
production process, whilst the non- JIT respondents viewed the batch orientation is a main
hindrance to AT application. The results of the JIT respondents are taken as more representative
because they have had the practical experience.45% of the JIT respondents claimed that the
problem of redesigning factory. Layout is a serious problem. Only 17% of the non- JIT
respondents had the same viewpoints. The fear of worsening current back order situation is not
very important as indicated by the low percentage of respondents agreeing on this factor.

19

11.Manufacturing process in supply chain

The manufacturing can be described as a subsystem of a company, which is responsible
for the management of materials, people and processes in order to reach required quality of
products in desirable time and by pre-determined cost level. To fulfill this goal many delivery
processes are necessary. These processes constitute the supply chain.

Taking into consideration the wide range of tasks in diverse areas, it is more and more
common for automotive industry enterprises to make use of logistics providers. Their main aims
consist of such actions as comprehensive delivery operations, stock-keeping and delivered
commodity sequencing. It is the aim of the logistics provider to organize and carry out those
actions in the best possible manner, e.g. using the Just-In-Time and Just-In-Sequence delivery,
with simultaneous attempts to limit costs of the plant and of the logistics provider it selves. To
assure the reliable character of its services, logistics providers make use of computer systems
such as Track &Trace in order to follow the delivery on the way. They also focus only on the
value added logistics type of tasks. This type of co-operation allows automotive plants to avoid
unnecessary additional actions and to fulfill core business tasks more efficiently. One of the most
commonly used delivery methods are the JIT and JIS types whose aim is to synchronize the
moment of delivery with the moment of the assembly, to minimize storage by frequent deliveries
of small portions and to eliminate defects. Using the JIT and JIS is only feasible with a close
integration in the supply chain be-cause the execution of these types of delivery is interwoven
with a fast and constant flow of information. As a result of this kind of co-operation, safety
buffers may be eliminated, delivery operation time shortened and the storage and quality indices
improved.

Fig.4. Logistical business process model

20

The manufacturing system is treated as a complex entity combining technological, social,

and economic subsystems, affected by business environment. Production planning in
dynamically changing business environment must be capable of dealing with uncertainty, enable
fulfillment of customers expectations with shorter delivery times, higher quality, and cost
effectiveness, as it determines the companys competitive position. Production planning based on
the Planned Order Release schedule and MRP concept seems to help to meet aforementioned
requirements. Comprehensive literature on a variety of buffering or dampening techniques to
minimize the effect of uncertainty can be found in (Dhamala & Thapa, 2012) The underlying
causes of uncertainty and effects they have on the manufacturing planning system with MRP
have been described in (Deutsch, 1949) (Horngren & Foster, 1987), who evaluated model for
diagnosis of manufacturing planning activities in order to identified why problems with late
deliveries of finished product appeared.

Fig.5. Supply Chain Synchronization

The desired characteristics of a production system are its high stability defined as
(Schultz, et al., 1997)steady production plans, high similarity of production routines, and high
similarity of product structure (Bill of Materials, or BOM). In order to protect the stability of a
production system and achieve the gains of economy of scale, the manufacturer has to combine
two policies in production planning: build-to-order and build-to-forecast.
Manufacturing is a sub-process of Customer Ordering Process which, in turn, is a part of
Logistical Business Process (Graf 2006). Product development process and production planning
carried out by Development, and material procurement process executed by Suppliers complete
logistical business process model.
21

12.CONCLUSION
Based on our study, the following conclusions are drawn. This paper focuses on the
application of JIT in Production system. Many are unaware of its existence, much less the
working of JIT. Even if there is awareness, the fear of rim and failures exists as relatively few
companies have successfully implemented JIT. Moreover, then benefits achieved locally are not
publicized, as there is a dearth of local research into and documentation of such results.
Companies applying it and reaping tremendous benefits may not wish to go around proclaiming
their achievement, as it would mean sharing a competitive advantage. Apart from these reasons,
the reluctance to use JIT may be due to the other factors as discussed previously, i.e. supplier,
personnel, products and production factors. Though hindrances do exist, the survey indicated that
these hurdles could be overcome. The report tells us about the relative performance of mixedmodel sequencing heuristic can be examined on the basis of ability to develop a sequence for
final assembly smoothing the rate of use of each component part feeding the assembly line. The
prerequisites in achieving successful JIT implementation are management commitment,
responsiveness to market tastes and that education and communication would be necessary to
achieve general acceptance of a JIT system. Hence, JIT will generate new ideas and ultimately
new products. This is consistent with the complaint that JIT's success is due to increased
pressure. However it suggests that the source of the pressure may be as much from peers as from
management. This is important to managers because it is the slowest process on any line that
forms the bottleneck and determines the output of that line. By speeding up the pace of the
slowest workers JIT decreases the imbalance of the line and improves productivity. There is no
guarantee that stronger task norms will lead to increased productivity. For instance, increased
worker cohesiveness in plants with a history of labor-management strife could easily result in
lower, not higher, and output. It remains to be demonstrated that these effects are lasting and will
continue to motivate behavior for long periods of time. The current study provides justification
for future longitudinal field studies. This research is also important to the understanding of group
dynamics in the workplace and to the modeling and management of low-inventory systems.
Finally, understanding of these systems is important to implementing and managing JIT
production facilities. Further research is needed to test these findings in ongoing concerns and
with different group tasks. The theory provides new tools for evaluating the effects of
government policies on trade and the structure of manufacturing production. Finally, further
research is needed to investigate how manufacturing strategy affects other operational practices
and employee involvement. The further depth and the linkages of the problems are the direction
of our study. Due to lack of detail survey and collections of data, we are unable to do the detail
mathematical modeling and statistical analysis.

22

REFERENCES
i.

Abdallah, A. B. & Matsui, Y., 2007. The relationship between JIT production and
Manufacturing strategy and their impact on JIT performance. Dallas,Texas,USA, s.n.

ii.

Adeyami, S., 2010. Just in Time Production System in Developing Countries:The

Nigerian Experience, Horin,Nigeria: University of Horin.

iii.

Anon., n.d. Journal of Applied Psychology. pp. 624-627.

iv.

Brown, K. A. & Mitchell, T. R., 1991. A comparison of just in time and batch
manufacturing:The role of performance obstacles. Academy of Manangement Journal.

v.

Dalton, J. T., 2009. A Theory of Just-in-Time and the Growth in, Scotland: Wake Forest
University.

vi.

Deutsch, M., 1949. An experimental study of effects of cooperation and competition upon
group process. Human relations.

vii.

Dhamala , T. N. & Thapa, G. B., 2012. An efficient frontier for sum deviation just in time
sequencing problem in mixed model system via apportionment. International Journal of
Automation and Computing, pp. 87-97.

viii.

Duglapa, E. A. & Bragg, D. J., 1998. Mixed Model Assembly line sequencing heuristics
for smoothing component parts usage. A Comparative Analysis.

ix.

Horngren, C. T. & Foster, G., 1987. Cost Accounting and Cost Management Issues, s.l.:
Management Accounting.

x.

Khashouie, G., 2003. Sequencing Mixed Model assembly lines in Just in time system,
United Kingdom: Brunel University.

xi.

Miltenberg, J., Steiner, G. & Yeomans, S., 1990. A Dynamic programming algorithm for
scheduling mixed model. JIT Production System:Mathematical and Computer Modelling.

xii.

Oyama, T., 1991. On a parameter divisor method for apportionment problem. Journal of
Operations Research Society.

xiii.

Pawlewski, P., Rejmicz, K., Stasiak, K. & Pieprz, M., n.d. JUST IN SEQUENCE
DELIVERY IMPROVEMENT BASED ON FLEXSIM SIMULATION EXPERIMENT.

xiv.

Schultz, K. L., Juran, D. C. & Boudreau, J. W., 1997. The Effects of JIT on the
Development of Productivity Norms, s.l.: Cornell University.

23

xv.

Sriparavastu, L. & Gupta, T., 1997. An empirical study of just in time and total quality
manangement principles implementation in manufacturing firms in USA. International
Journal of Operations and production manangement, p. 1215.

xvi.

Thapa, Gyan Bahadur; Silvestrov Sergei;, 2015. Suppy Chain Logistics in Multi-Level.
Just in Time Production Sequencing Problem.

xvii.

Thapa, G. B., 2012. Characterizations of just in time sequencing problems with

apportionment and supply chain, Tribhuwan University,nepal: s.n.

xviii.

Thapa, G. B., 2015. Optimization of just in time sequencing problesm and supply chain
logistics, Sweden: Division of Applied Mathenmatics,Malardan University.

xix.

Thapa, G. B., 2015. Supply Chain Logistics in Multi- Level Jsut in Time Production
Sequencing System.

xx.

Thapa, G. B. & Dhamala, T. N., 2009. A Synthetic Study to minimize the inequality
measures in just in time sequencing problem via optimization method. Malaysia, s.n., pp.
462-470.

xxi.

Thapa, G. B. & Dhamala, T. N., 2009. Just in Time Sequencing in mixed model
production system relating with fair representation in apportionment theory,
Kathmandu,Nepal: Tribhuwam University.

xxii.

Thapa, G. B. & Dhamala, T. N., 2010. Cross Docking Operations for supply chain
laogistics under multi level just in time production environment, Kathmandu: s.n.

xxiii.

Yasin, M. M. & Wafa, M., 1996. An empirical examination of factors influencing JIT
success. International Journal of Operation of operations and production and
manangement, p. 19.

24