Team ITSapiens can help quickly translate your business requirements into technical specifications.
Here’s just a simple example of how we work:
What are your choices in SNP APO on required business functions?
SNP Heuristics and CTM Approach:
| Functionality |
SNP -Heuristics |
CTM |
| Demand Prioritization |
Not supported in std functions in APO 3.0 |
Demands can be prioritized at location or location product level |
| Capacity |
Assumes infinite capacity. Have tools to identify capacity load reports |
Capacity constrained or Infinite capacity planning possible |
| Resource types considered |
Production, Transportation, Storage, Handling |
Production |
| Lot size Requirements |
Respects lot sizes (no respect to variable periodic lot sizing to model product wheels) |
Respects Lot sizes (periodic lot sizing
done in a work around time stream fashion) |
| Sourcing |
Quota Based |
Cost based (PPM, Transportation),
priority or quota arrangements |
| Periodic Planning |
Supports periodic lot sizes. Generates one order per period
Periodicity facilitated in Planning Books
|
Order by order planning tool most suited for Hi-Tech Industry
|
| Product substitution |
Not supported |
Supported to facilitate promising
Capability based on inventory and order search in database
|
| Complexity |
Minimal |
Based on supply chain can become complex |
| Product constraint Plan |
No |
Plan is capacity and material constraint |
| Fixed Pegging |
No |
Orders can be created with fixed pegging |
| Performance |
Not performance intensive |
Performance oriented and depends on Volume loads. (Take a Test Drive) |
| Parallel Processing |
Supported |
Supported |
Comparison of different methods of APO planning tools and Traditional R/3 MRP:
Variations in Results
| # |
Results |
Description |
R/3 MRP |
HEU |
OPT |
CTM |
| 1 |
Multi location |
Support for Bill of Distribution Explosion (SNP PPM + Transportation Lane) |
N |
Y |
Y |
Y |
| 2 |
Feasible Infinite Plan |
Feasible:
Technically possible based on capacity at daily bucket
Infinite:
Product Sequencing within the daily bucket is not considered i.e. plan could be accurate up to seconds
|
|
|
Y |
Y |
| 3 |
Optimize Plan |
Plan is optimized based on Penalty Minimization |
|
|
Y |
|
| 4 |
Feasible Finite Plan |
Finite ? Product sequencing within the daily is considered.
(Note: This is different from optimize feasible finite plan which could only be done in PPDS) |
|
|
|
Y |
| 5 |
Pegging |
Ability to link a supply element to a demand element via static or dynamic pegging |
|
|
|
Y |
Variations in Features
| # |
Features |
SNPHEU |
SNP OPT |
CTM |
PPDS |
| 1 |
Calendar |
Support for Bill of Distribution Explosion (SNP PPM + Transportation Lane) |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
| 2 |
Product Master |
Lot Sizing
|
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
| |
|
Safety stock Quantity |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
| |
|
Lead Times |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Planning both In (I) and Out (O) of production horizon |
Out |
Out |
Out & In |
In |
| 3 |
Scrap Parameters |
|
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
| 4 |
Component Availability |
|
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
| 5 |
Transportation Lanes |
Sourcing decisions |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
| |
|
Sourcing optimization based on TL cost |
|
Y |
|
|
| 6 |
Quota Arrangement |
|
Use |
Update |
|
Use |
| 7 |
Capacity Availability |
Production |
|
Y |
Y |
Y |
| |
|
Transportation |
Y |
|
|
|
| |
|
Handling |
Y |
|
|
Y |
| |
|
Storage |
Y |
|
|
|
| 8 |
Product Level Penalty Minimization |
Storage Penalty |
|
Y |
|
Y(PC) |
| |
|
Non Delivery Penalty |
|
Y |
|
Y |
| |
|
Late Delivery Penalty |
|
Y |
|
Y |
| |
|
Procurement Penalty |
|
Y |
|
Y |
| |
|
Safety stock Penalty |
|
Y |
|
|
| 9 |
PPM |
Alternate PPM |
|
Y |
|
Y |
| |
|
Alternate Resource (Mode) |
|
Y |
|
Y |
| |
|
Time Dependent Parameters |
|
Y |
Y |
Y |
| 10 |
Priority |
Product |
|
Y |
Y |
Y |
| |
|
Location |
|
|
Y |
|
| |
|
Demand(Customer) |
|
|
Y |
Y |
| 11 |
Supply Category |
|
|
|
Y |
|
| 12 |
Constraints |
|
|
|
Y |
|
| 13 |
Pegging Network |
|
|
|
Y |
|
| 14 |
Setup matrix |
-Respect transition time |
|
|
Y |
Y |
| |
|
-Optimize Transition Time |
|
|
|
Y |
|
