Diego Augusto de Jesus Pacheco
University Federal of Rio Grande do Sul, UFRGS –
Brazil
E-mail: profdajp@gmail.com
Isaac Pergher
FTEC, Caxias do Sul– Brazil
E-mail: isaacpergher@ftec.com.br
Carlos Fernando Jung
Faculdades
Integradas de Taquara, FACCAT – Brazil
E-mail: carlosfernandojung@gmail.com
Carla Scwenberg ten Caten
University Federal of Rio Grande do Sul, UFRGS –
Brazil
E-mail: tencaten@producao.ufrgs.br
Submission: 11/09/2013
Revision: 25/09/2013
Accept: 19/10/2013
ABSTRACT
The main objective of this
article is to point a set of practical strategies that can be adopted to
increase the capacity of constraints resources on production systems, when the
constraint is inside the factory and not is in the market. To serve this
purpose will be presented strategies based on best practices of the Theory of
Constraints, Lean Manufacturing and Total Productive Maintenance. This article
also presents the mains tools for the deployment of these methodologies. The
survey results have provided an objective set of practical strategy that can be
used to increase the capacity and productivity of production systems according
to the needs of each manufacturing system.
1.
INTRODUCTION
Hayes et al. (2008) argue that to
measure the capacity of productive systems it is a complex task, due to action
of the following factors: politics of the company, trustworthiness of the
suppliers, trustworthiness of the equipment, taxes of production, impact of the
human factors and variability. For Hopp and Spearman (2001) the variability
exists in all the production systems and can cause great impact in the
performance of capacity. For this reason, the ability to measure, to understand
and to manage becomes it critical for an efficient administration of the
production. Aiming at to manage and to raise the capacity of manufacture
systems, this article investigates the contributions that can offer Theory of
Constraints (TOC), Total Productive Maintenance (TPM), Lean Manufacturing and
its elements.
The integrated use of the Theory of Constraints with the Lean comes
being argued for some authors as Dettmer (2001), Antunes (1998), Scheinkopf and
Moore (2004), Sproull (2009) and Pacheco (2013;2014).
Dettmer (2001) for instance, indicated the following points of similarity
between the two approaches: they possess the common objective to increase
profits, the value is defined by the customer, the factor quality is essential
for both, they aim at the reduction of the lots of production, search the flow,
the increase of the capacity continuous, the minimization of the inventory and
the participation of the work force fulfill excellent paper in the success of
the unfolding of the method and the tools.
Bonal et al. (1996) had
shown that the integrated use of the TOC and the TPM results in a boarding of
increase of the financial results of an organization, from the increase of the
efficiency and the capacity of the productive passes. Ed Rose et. al (1995) presented the
following benefits of the integrated use of the TOC and the TPM to raise the
capacity of systems: i) with the identification of the restrictive equipment
using the TOC, a directed teams of TPM can itself be created to decide to take
its performance; ii) when identifying the pass, the next resource also must be
analyzed to reduce the losses of the productive flow; iii) it is possible to
add to the TPM an improvement program contend other approaches (5S, visual
control, fast exchange of tools, analysis of stops of machines, etc.) that they
contribute to raise the capacity of the bottleneck.
Having in sight
the above-mentioned points of convergence, it is viable to think about the
unification of the two techniques in quarrel guided to raise capacity of
productive systems. Being thus, the present article will go to explore this
analysis being aimed at to present a set of extracted strategies of TOC, Lean
and TPM.
2.
TOYOTA SYSTEM OF PROUCTION (TPS): THE DNA OF LEAN
With intense global competition, firms strive to
provide their customers with highly valued products and services. Demanding
customers expected these firms to integrate complex sets of requirements in
terms of outstanding quality, competitive prices, reliable delivery and
innovative features (TOMINO et al., 2009). In this context, the
lean philosophy is growing and invading companies in the West. Currently, there
is a great search of the concepts of Lean Manufacturing by Western companies,
considering the needs become more competitive, based on the benefits that the
TPS can provide, considering the performance of Japanese companies (SCHONBERGER, 2007). The TPS are often articulated
with mandates such as
eliminating waste, rooting out defects and reducing lead times. (JAYARAM; DAS; NICOLAE, 2010).
Developed in Toyota plants in Japan by Sakichi Toyoda,
Kiichiro Toyoda, Taiichi Ohno and Shigeo Shingo, this system consists of
several tools, among which are highlighted: Quick Change Tool, Kanban, Poka
Yoke, 5S, standardization activity work, Preventive Maintenance and
manufacturing cells, focused on two basic STP, Automation (or automation with a
human touch) and Just-in-time (JIT), as Ohno (1997). The pillar JIT, Kanban is
intended to send the information necessary for the operation of the entire
system (OHNO, 1997), however, the JIT is not feasible without the support of
the concept of Automation/Zero Defect, because in this case the materials could
arrive at the right amount, at the right place at the right time, however, with
inadequate quality. The STP philosophy has been applied in many different areas
as: Health (SEREMBUS; MELOY; POSMONTIER,
2012; STAPLETON et al.,
2009); Product
development (WANG, CONBOY, CAWLEY, 2012); and Logistics (KANEKO; NOJIRI, 2008; HAAN; NAUS; OVERBOOM, 2012).
As Shingo (1996b) the production systems can be
understood by the logic of the Mechanism of Function Production (MFP). In the
logic of the MFP the production constitutes a net of processes and operations
or phenomena that if locate throughout axes that if divide in parts. In the
concept of production of Shingo (1996a), the MFP can be understood according
as: i) function process: the flow of products between the operations in the
time and the space, that is, materials, tasks, ideas; ii) function operation:
the flow of the citizen of works in the time and the space, that is, the
operators and the machines. Shingo (1996b) affirms that the priority of the
production improvements, must be given to the function process and thus being
the strategies presented in this work to raise the capacity of productive
systems are related to the function process.
According Ghinato (1996) the TPS has been more
recently, referenced as “Lean Production System”. The term “Lean” was created
originally in the book “The Machine that Changed the World” of Womack, Jones
and Roos (1990), as resulted of an ample study on the world-wide automobile
industry carried through by the MIT in which it proved the advantages in the
use of the TPS. The study it evidenced that the TPS provided to expressive
differences in relation to the productivity, quality, development of products
and explained the success of the Japanese industry at the time. In this
direction, the 5 principles of the Lean, as Womack and Jones (1996) and Rother and
Shook (1998) are: i) Necessarily to specify the value for specific product; ii)
To identify the flow of value for each product; iii) It makes the value to flow
without interruptions; iv) To pull; v) To search the perfection.
3.
TOTAL PRODUCTIVE MAINTENANCE (TPM)
For
Nakajima (1988) the measures of Index of Operational Income Global (IROG) must
be considered as an operational indicator and can inside be applied in diverse
levels of a manufacture system. It can be used with benchmark to measure the
level of performance of a productive system of global form. That is, the IROG
is measured initially and compared with an IROG future after the system to have
passed for a program of improvements or then compared with the performance of
other similar systems. It can be calculated in systems of manufacture with
diverse lines of production, providing to verify which the real levels of use
of the assets of the industry.
The IROG
can individually be calculated in machines, making possible to identify which
machines they possess high performance or low (in relation to one given goal),
thus directing the focus of action of the TPM with one all. The quarrel of the
IROG is central for the calculation of the capacity because it determines the
practical capacity and not theoretician of the equipment and systems. Equation
1 presents the generic equation of calculation of the IROG:
[1]
Where:
tp: it is the time of cycle or time standard of product X;
q: it is the amount of processed products X;
T: it is the available time for production.
It is verified in this
equation, that the multiplication of the time of cycle of a product for the
produced amount of this product in one determined equipment corresponds to the
time of aggregation of value of this equipment in the production process on the
practical prism of lean practices (ANTUNES, 1998). The calculation of the IROG
is made considering the following aspects: if the work rank is a resource pass,
in this in case the measures IROG is called TEEP (Total Effective Equipment
Productivity) and if the work rank is a resource not pass, in this in this
case, the IROG is called of OEE (Overall Equipment Efficiency). The
considerations above consist of the calculation of the global efficiency of the
equipment traverse of the general equation, having to be unfolded, as Nakajima
(1988) with the purpose to identify the main causes of the inefficiencies
observed in the workstation, in function of the following index of efficiency,
as equation 2:
[2]
Where:
μ1: Index of Operational Time - ITO;
μ 2: Index of Operational Performance - IPO;
μ 3: Index of Approved Products – IPA.
ITO corresponds to the time
where the equipment was available, abstaining the stops not coded. It is
related, therefore, with the stoppage of the equipment. That is, when the speed
of the same falls the zero. The IPO measures the operational performance of the
resource, being calculated in function of the available time and to the
reduction of the speed of the same, of moment operation in emptiness and stops.
It is related, therefore, with the fall of speed of the resource (nominal
different speed of and the different one of zero). The last indicator analyzed
is the IPA that measures the quality of the produced parts, being calculated in
function of the real running time, abstaining the time expense with rubbish or
working again. As Nakajima (1988) to raise the equipment capacity it is
necessary to also control the following parameters:
a) Mean time between failures (MTBF): the arithmetic
mean of the existing times, for repairable equipment and in functioning, enters
the end of an imperfection and beginning of another imperfection, the next
imperfection.
b) Mean time to repair (MTTR): the arithmetic mean of
the times of repair of a system, an item or a equipment.
c) Availability (A) is the fraction of time the
equipment is in operation, performing the function for which it was intended.
Given by Equation 3:
[3]
4.
THEORY OF CONSTRAINTS (TOC)
Theory
of Constraints (TOC) was development by physics Eliyahu M. Goldratt and spread
off through books, games and movies. Second Wong et al. (2009) TOC is a management philosophy to lead
the organizations to get better results in terms of continuous improvement and
goals. Different areas have been applying TOC (GOLDRATT, 2009; BEVILACQUA;
CIARAPICA; GIACCHETTA, 2009; WU et
al., 2010; LINHARES, 2009). The TOC can be understood
from the following components according Antunes et al. (2008), Cox and Spencer (2002) and
Mabin and Balderstone (2000):
a) The Logistic boarding and of Operations, that
involve the following methods: the five steps involving the focus in the
improvement of the processes, the process of programming of the production
involving the management saw logic DBR (Drum, Buffer and Rope), the management
of the buffers in the productive system and the analysis of the productive
systems adopting classification V-A-T.
b) The proposal of a System of Measurements of Performance,
that passes for: definition of the Profits, Inventories and Operational
Expenses of the Company, Definition of the mix of products that will have to be
produced aiming at to maximize the results and the logic of the Profits per day
and the Inventories per day.
c) And finally, the TOC can be understood as a Thinking
Process aiming at to the solution of problems that involves the following
techniques: the Current Reality Tree (CRT), the Future Reality Tree (FRT), The
Primary Requisite Tree (PRT), Transition Tree (TT) and the method of the
Evaporation of Clouds.
Some examples of study to apply the TOC approach as DBR, System of
Measurements of Performance, and Thinking Process in different environment are:
Rossi Filho et al. (2012); Pergher, Rodrigues and Lacerda (2011); Georgiadi
and Politou (2013). The quarrel
of this article to raise the capacity will go to approach and to detail the 5
steps of the focus and method DBR of the TOC. Goldratt
(1991) presents the five steps of the targeting process:
Identify
the restriction of the system. It can be internal or external to the company.
When the total demand of data mix of products is bigger of what the capacity of
the plant says that a production pass has itself. However, when the production
capacity is superior to the production demand the restriction is external to
the productive system, that is, the restriction is related with the market and
to the performance of the commercial area of the company.
Explore
of the best possible form the restriction of the system. If the restriction is
internal to the plant, the best decision consists of maximizing the profit in
the pass. If she will be external to the system in data time, they do not exist
passes in the plant and the profit will be limited by the restrictions of the
market and to the sales performance of the company.
Subordinate
all the too much resources to the decision taken in step 2. The logic of this
step, independently of the external or internal restriction to be, consists of
reducing to the maximum the operational inventories and expenditures and at the
same time to guarantee the maximum theoretical profit of the production system.
Raise the
capacity of the constraints. If the pass will be internal is necessary to
increase its productive capacity. This can be made through changes of layout,
equipment purchase, reduction of the variability, reduction of setup, etc. In
this step, the Toyota Production System presents a series of tools and
techniques of improvement that can be used, that they will not be argued by not
being the focus of the analysis. Already the variability can be understood and
be improved from the optics of the Factory Physics developed by Hopp and
Spearman (2001, chapter 7 and 8).
Come back
to step 1 not to leave that inertia takes account of the system. When raising the productive capacity of the
restriction the system becomes, a priori, a generic system, what it generates
the necessity to analyze it is again. Steps 4 and 5 they show the character of
searched continuous improvement in the TOC, with the objective systematically
to reach permanent and the global goal of the system: “to today generate profit
and in the future”.
The DBR
aims at to operationalize in the factory the five steps of improvement of the
processes of the TOC. To Georgiadis and Politou (2013), DBR approaches provide
production managers with effective tools to manage production disruptions and
improve operational performance. To Lee et
al. (2010) DBR works effectively in
typical job shop environments. Traditional
DBR uses a three-buffer system to protect both the due-dates and detailed
finite capacity schedule of the capacity constraint resources (CCR). This
approach offers more protection than merely keeping the CCR from starvation as
a result of delay on the non-constraint resources. Starvation is defined in TOC as the condition where
the constraint resource is without work to perform. From a system perspective, if
the constraint buffer is empty and the constraint is idle or starved, system
throughput is lost (BETTERTON; COX, 2009).
TOC defines Throughput as the rate
at which the system generates ‘goal units’. According Watson, Blackstone and Gardiner (2007), the
phase ‘Explore of the best possible
form the restriction of the system’ seeks to achieve the highest rate of throughput possible within the
confines of the system’s current resources. The output of the system is limited
by the rate of throughput at the constraint; therefore, the third step is to
subordinate the system to the constraint. In this way, DBR uses the ‘rope’ to
fit non-constraint resources according constraint resource production rate.
The
elements of logic DBR are: ‘Drum’: it is the pass of the system, which
determines its total productive capacity; therefore, it defines the rhythm of
the production and restricts the capacity, that is, is the drum of the system,
a time that said its rhythm of production; ‘Buffer’: it is the protection
placed before the drum for to prevent the impact of the variability, as
variation, machine in addition in the process time, problem of quality or lack
of substance cousin to produce. It has three types of lung that can be used in
this case: lung of time, inventory or of capacity; and ‘Rope’: it has the
objective to signal the necessity of entrance of materials in the system, to
feed the lung and the pass and to limit the amount of set free raw material for
the plant. A reference model to realize the strategic management of productive
capacity of the manufacturing integrating TOC and efficiency indicators can be
found in Pacheco et al. (2012a).
5.
PROPOSITION OF STRATEGIES TO ELEVATE CAPACITY OF
INTERNAL CONSTRAINTS
From the literature review, intervention strategies related to the fourth step of the TOC (Raise), apply when the bottleneck is inside the factory, is when the total demand for a given product mix is greater
than the capacity of the plant. As Antunes
and Rodrigues, (1998), Umble and Srikanth (1990), Goldratt (1990), Sproull (2009),
Dettmer (2001), Hayes et al. (2008), Scheinkopf and
Moore (2004), Hopp and Spearman (2001) these are the main actions to increase
the capacity of the internal restriction of the factory. It is worth noting that the application and analysis of
strategies independent of the order they are
presented in text and can be adopt her individually
and independently or from a combination between them.
·
Strategy 1: Eliminate all periods of time lost in the bottleneck. An hour lost on bottleneck is an hour lost in the whole system and being
bottleneck should operate 24 hours a day.
·
Strategy 2: Improved processing times per unit. Perform continuous improvement actions in the working methods and the
optimum use of the potential of the equipment.
·
Strategy 3: Deliver improvements in the power system engineer. The goal should be to synchronize the timing of food resources with the
speed of processing of the resource itself, seeking continuous system flow.
·
Strategy 4: Improve the quality control system. The initiatives should
ensure that there is no defective part is processed in the neck, which can be obtained by adopting a 100% inspection immediately before
the bottleneck should also ensure that all part is that go through bottleneck Throughput
(GOLDRATT, 1992; CORBETT, 1997) for managing the organization, is the production of defects and rework after
the bottleneck is zero.
·
Strategy 5: Making the contracting
out or outsourcing of work from the bottle. In other words, implies subcontract
or outsource part of production that was previously done by its neck in order
to purchase additional capacity (UMBLE; SRIKANTH, 1990).
·
Strategy 6: Buy additional
capacity. You can obtain the following ways: buying new machine, hiring new
workers to the neck, using overtime for workers in the neck or adding shifts to
production.
·
Strategy 7: Relocation of the
operations previously performed in the neck for other non-bottleneck machines
that are operating with a surplus of capacity. The goal this point is to divide
the operation of the bottleneck in smaller sub-operations and redistribute
them.
·
Strategy 8: Make improvements in
the maintenance of machine bottleneck and critical system resources. The
objective of working to improve the maintenance of machine bottleneck is to
increase the coefficient of utilization (TEEP) and the availability (A) of the
critical resources in manufacturing.
·
Strategy 9: Conduct analysis and
layout changes. At this point, it is suggested to apply the concepts of lean
thinking mobile layout and simulate scenarios proposed using the technique of
computer simulation to aid in decision making, apart from the results of the
simulation.
·
Strategy 10: Implement the algorithm
Drum-Buffer-Rope (DBR) system. The use of the DBR aims to operate on the
factory floor to the five steps of process improvement of TOC, synchronizes the
system from the bottleneck and protects the capacity of the bottleneck using
the buffer immediately prior to the drum.
·
Strategy 11: Raise the TEEP of the
resource bottleneck. His discussion is central to the capacity calculation
because it determines the theoretical and not practical capacity of the
equipment. The increase in TEEP can be done in the following ways:
a)
Raise the μ1: Index of Operational Time (ITO);
b)
Raise the μ2: Index of Operational Performance (IPO);
c)
Raise the μ3: Index of Approved Products (IPA).
·
Strategy 12: Increase the
availability (A) of the resource bottleneck. This strategy can be implemented
as follows: MTFB raising and reducing the MTTR of the equipment.
·
Strategy 13: Oriented approach to product development. The idea is to develop new products or
components that would not bottleneck of the factory, aiming to exploit the gaps
in the capacity of non-bottleneck resources.
·
Strategy 14: Modify existing
products or components in order to reduce the processing time on bottleneck
resource factory. Joint
action between the area of Process Engineering and Product Engineering Company
seeking to modify the concept of products focusing on the bottleneck; tend to
generate good which alter.
·
Strategy 15: Conduct analysis and
improvement of the bottleneck applying the subsystems and techniques of TPS.
Suggest apply: Zero Defects, Standard Operation, SMED (Single-Minute Exchange of Die), Flow Synchronization and
Continuous Improvement are good improvement
strategies. The goal is to extend the TOC, the benefits that Lean
approaches provide.
·
Strategy 16: Conduct analysis of restriction from
seven losses in the TPS. The combination of the elimination of seven losses in
the operation can generate earnings capacity in the bottleneck. It is
recommended that this analysis is made by a multidisciplinary group
involving the operators of the processes analyzed.
·
Strategy 17: Conduct analysis of improvement in the
ergonomic point of view of the operation. Time and motion study, derived from
scientific management are recommended.
·
Strategy 18: Make improvements in
the productive system as a whole. In this case indicates the application of the
principles of synchronous manufacturing, based on nine OPT rules and derived
from the five focusing steps of TOC.
·
Strategy 19: Evaluate the application of first principle
of TOC that says to not to focus in the balancing of the capacities and yes to
focus the synchronization of the flow. This principle elapses of that the
capacity of the resources is finite and to the effect of the statistical
fluctuations and the dependence between the resources.
·
Strategy 20:
Evaluate the application of second principle TOC that says the value marginal
of the time in the resource bottleneck is equal to the rate of profit of the
products processed for the bottleneck. That is, one hour earns in the pass
represents one hour earns all in the system.
·
Strategy 21: Apply the third principle
TOC that says the marginal value of time in a resource bottleneck is not
negligible. That is, the focus is the actions of improvement must be in the
restriction of the system.
·
Strategy
22: To consider the fourth principle of TOC that
statements that the level of use of a
resource pass is not controlled for the restriction of the system. In
principle, the idea is that the decision on the use of non-bottleneck must be
made by analyzing the resource bottleneck.
·
Strategy
23: Apply the fifth principle of TOC that
statement the resources must be used and not only activated. The use concept
mentions the activation to it of resources that contribute positively for the
performance of the company that is to generate profits for the Company.
·
Strategy
24: Apply the sixth principle indeed the lot of
transference does not need to be, and many times do not have to be, equal to
the lot of process. The lot of process is the amount of product processed in a
resource before the same it is moved to manufacture one another different
product that is, after the execution of setup. Lot of transference is the
amount of units that are removed and put into motion at the same time (in one
it crowds) of a resource for the following resource. To use lesser lots of
transference of what the lots of process present considerable advantages: it
helps to keep the synchronization of the production, soon after the pass, how
much lesser the used lot of transference lesser will be the total time of
crossing of the products and how much lesser the lots of transference more
quickly will be discovered the defects of product quality or parts.
·
Strategy
25: Apply the seventh principle that says the
process batch should be variable. The process batch should be variable along
the route of manufacture and over time. It is reasonable to assume that the lot
in process can vary throughout the route of manufacture due to the impact of
the statistical fluctuations of the system and the different capacities of the
resources.
6. CONCLUSION
This article sought to achieve a set of strategies can be adopted to increase the capacity constraints in production systems, where the constraint is internal to the factory, from of the TOC, TPM and Lean. Was enumerated a set of 25
intervention strategies that contribute to the increased capacity of
restriction in a manufacturing system. Is valid considering that the strategies listed before being applied in the real world, require the analysis of two important variables: time and investment required.
Antunes (1998) suggests that to reduce the preparation time, to improve the feed of the machines and avoid the time lost in the
bottleneck typically require low investments. To extend that study suggested that: include in the
discussion of the vision of Six Sigma methodology and Factory Physics, aiming to bring new analysis variables giving more robustness to propositions and include in the discussion of the
remaining items of the TOC analysis as the VAT analysis and thinking process tools. For new researches in
industrial manufacturing context, the starting point of alignment between
three approaches to the production strategy
can be found
in Pacheco (2012b).
REFERENCES
ANTUNES JR., J.
(1998) Towards a general theory of the
case in production management: a discussion about the possibility of unifying
theory of constraints and the theory that supports the construction of
production systems with zero inventory. Thesis (Ph.D. in Business
Administration). Post Graduate Program in Management of UFRGS, Porto Alegre, RS.
ANTUNES, J.A.V.;
RODRIGUES, L. H. (1993) Theory of Constraints: an analysis of the actions of
improvements necessary to raise the capacity constraints. Production, Porto Alegre, v. 3, n. 1, p. 73-86.
ANTUNES, J.; ALVAREZ, R.; KLIPPEL, M.; BORTOLOTTO, P.;
PELLEGRIN, I. (2008) Sistemas de
Produção: Conceitos e Práticas para Projeto e Gestão da Produção Enxuta. 1.
ed. Porto Alegre: Bookman.
BETTERTON, C.
E.; COX III, J. F. (2009) Espoused drum-buffer-rope flow control in serial
lines: A comparative study of simulation models, International Journal of Production Economics, v. 117, p. 66-79,
ISSN 0925-5273, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2008.08.050.
BEVILACQUA, M.;
CIARAPICA, F.E.; GIACCHETTA, G. (2009) Critical chain and risk analysis applied
to high-risk industry maintenance: A case study, International Journal of Project Management, v. 27,pp. 419-432,
ISSN 0263-7863,
BONAL, J. et al.
Overall Fab Efficiency. Advanced Semiconductor Manufacturing Conference IEEEISEMI, 1996, p. 49-52.
CORBETT NETO, T. (1997) Contabilidade de ganhos: a nova contabilidade gerencial de
acordo com a teoria das restrições. São Paulo: Nobel.
DETTMER, W. (2001)
Beyond Lean Manufacturing:Combining Lean and the Theory of Constraints for Higher Performance. Goal System International. Port Angeles, WA, USA.
ED ROSE; ODOM, R.;
DUNBAR, B.; HINCHMAN, J. (1995) How TOC & TPM Work Together to Build the
Quality Toolbox of SDWTs. IEEEKPMT -
Electronlcs Manufacturing Technology Symposium. p.56-59.
GEORGIADIS, P.;
POLITOU, A. (2013) Dynamic Drum-Buffer-Rope approach for production planning
and control in capacitated flow-shop manufacturing systems, Computers & Industrial Engineering,
v. 65, p. 689-703, ISSN 0360-8352,
GOLDRATT, E. M.;
FOX E. R. (1987) The race. NY: The
North River Press.
GOLDRATT, E. M.
(1990) The Haystack Syndrome. NY:
The North River Press.
GOLDRATT, E. M. (1991) A síndrome do Palheiro: Garimpando informações num oceano de dados.
São Paulo: Educator.
GOLDRATT, E. M.
(2009) Standing on the Shoulders of Giants – Production concepts versus production
applications The Hitachi Tool Engineering example. In: Gestão & Produção, v. 16, n. 3, p. 333-343.
HAAN, J.; NAUBS,
F.; OVERBOOM, M. (2012) Creative tension in a lean work environment:
Implications for logistics firms and workers, International Journal of Production Economics, v. 137, p. 157-164,
ISSN 0925-5273.
HAYES, R.; PISANO,
G.; UPTON, D.; WHELLWRIGHT, S. (2008) Production,
technology and strategy: in search of competitive advantage. Porto Alegre:
Bookman.
HOPP, W.;
SPEARMAN, M. L. (2001) Factory Physics.
Boston: Irwin.
JAYARAM, J.;
DAS, A.; NICOLAE, J. (2010) Looking beyond the obvious: Unraveling the Toyota
production system. International Journal
of Production Economics. v. 128, n. 1, p. 280-291.
LEE, JUN-HUEI.; CHANG,
JIA-GING.; TSAI, CHIH-HUNG.; LI, RONG-KWEI. (2010) Research on enhancement of
TOC Simplified Drum-Buffer-Rope system using novel generic procedures, Expert Systems with Applications, v.
375. p. 3747-3754.
LINHARES, A.
(2009) Theory of constraints and the combinatorial complexity of the
product-mix decision, International
Journal of Production Economics, v. 121, p. 121-129.
MABIN, V. J.; BALDERSTONE.
S. J. (2000) The World of the Theory of
Constraints: A Review of the International Literature. FL: St. Lucie Press.
MOORE, R.; SCHEINKOPF,
L. (1998) Theory of constraints and lean
manufacturing: friends or foes.
OHNO, T. (1997) The Toyota Production System: Beyond large
scale production. Porto Alegre: Bokmann.
PACHECO, A. J.
P. et al. (2012) Modelo de gerenciamento de capacidade produtiva: integrando teoria
das restrições e o índice de rendimento operacional global (IROG). Produção Online, v.12, n. 3, p.
806-826, jul./set.
PACHECO, D. A. J. (2012b) Integrando a Estratégia de Produção com a
Teoria das Restrições, Lean e Seis Sigma: uma abordagem metodológica. 2012.
Dissertação (Mestrado em Engenharia de Produção e Sistemas)-Universidade
do
Vale do Rio dos Sinos, São Leopoldo.
PACHECO, D. A. J. et al. Balanceamento de fluxo ou
balanceamento de capacidade: análise e proposições sistêmicas. Ahead to print in Gestão & Produção,
2013.
PACHECO, D. A. J. Teoria das Restrições, lean
manufacturing e seis sigma: limites e possibilidades de integração. Ahead to print in
Revista Produção, 2014.
PERGHER, I.; RODRIGUES, L. H.;LACERDA, D. P. (2011)
Discussão teórica sobre o conceito de perdas do Sistema Toyota de Produção:
inserindo a lógica do ganho da Teoria das Restrições. Gestão & Produção,
v. 18, n. 4, p. 673-686.
ROSSI FILHO, T. A.; PERGHER, I.; LACERDA, D. P.;
RODRIGUES, J. H. (2012) Aplicação do Processo de Pensamento da Teoria das
Restrições para o desenvolvimento sustentável: Uma proposição teórica. Espacios. v. 33, n. 8.
ROTHER, M.;
JOHN, S. (1998) Learning to See: Value
Stream Mapping to add value and eliminate waste. Sao Paulo-SP, Brazil Lean
Enterprise Institute.
SCHONBERGER, R. J.
(2007). Japanese production management:an evolution with mixed results. Journal of Operations Management, v.
25, p. 403–419.
SHINGO, S.
(1996a) The Toyota Production System:
From the standpoint of production engineering. Porto Alegre: Bookman.
SHINGO, S.
(1996b) Manufacturing Systems with Zero
Inventory: The Shingo system for continuous improvement. Porto Alegre:
Bookman.
SPROULL, B.
(2009) The Ultimate Improvement Cycle – Maximizing Profits Through the Integration
of Lean, Six Sigma, and the Theory of Constraints, CRC Press, Taylor &
Francis Group, Boca Raton, FL.
SEREMBU, J. F.;
MELOY, F.; POSMONTIER, B. (2012) Learning from Business: Incorporating the
Toyota Production System into Nursing Curricula. Nursing Clinics of North America, v. 47, n. 4, p.503-516, ISSN
0029-6465.
STAPLETON, F. B.;
HENDRICKS, J.; HAGAN, P.; DELBECCARO, M. (2009) Modifying the Toyota Production
System for Continuous Performance Improvement in an Academic Children's
Hospital, Pediatric Clinics of North
America, v. 56, p. 799-813,
TOMINO, T.;
PARK, Y.; HONG, P.; J. J. (2009) Market flexible customizing system (MFCS) of
Japanese vehicle manufacturers: An analysis of Toyota, Nissan and Mitsubishi. International Journal of Production Economics,
v. 118, n. 2, p. 375-386.
UMBLE, M. M.;
SRIKANTH, M. L. (1990) Synchronous
Manufacturing: Principles for World Class Excellence. South-Western Publishing
Company, Cincinnati, Ohio.
WANG, X.;
CONBOY, K.; CAWLEY, O. (2012) “Leagile” software development: An experience
report analysis of the application of lean approaches in agile software
development, Journal of Systems and
Software, v. 85, p. 1287-1299.
WATSON, K.
J.;BLACKSTONE, J. H.; GARDINER, S. C. (2007) The evolution of a management
philosophy: The theory of constraints, Journal
of Operations Management, v. 25, p.387-402.
WOMACK, J. P.;
JONES, D. T.; ROOS, D. (1990) The Machine
That Changed the World. Harper Perennial, New York.
WOMACK, J. P.;
JONES, D. T. (1996) Lean Thinking:
Banish Waste and Create
Wealth in Your
Corporation. Simon &
Schuster, New York.
WONG, C.; ORTIZ, M.; TORCASIO, A.; RODRIGUEZ, E.;
COLLADO, M. (2009) Estrategias para el mejoramiento de la gestión de
mantenimiento usando la teoría de restricciones. Espacios, v.
30, n. 2, p. 22-32.
WU,HORNG-HUEI.,
CHEN, CHING-PIAO.; TSAI, CHIH-HUNG.; TAI-PING, TSAI. (2010) A study of an
enhanced simulation model for TOC supply chain replenishment system under
capacity constraint, Expert Systems with
Applications, v. 37, p. 6435-6440.