Chapter 12
Question 11: briefly describe MRP II and closed-loop MRP.
MRP II did not replace or improve MRP. Rather, it expanded the scope of materials planning to include capacity requirements planning, and to involve other functional areas of the organization such as marketing and finance in the planning process.
Production, marketing, and finance personnel work toward developing a master production schedule. Although manufacturing people will have a major input in determining that schedule and a major responsibility for making it work, marketing and finance will also have important inputs and responsibilities. The rationale for having these functional areas work together is the increased likelihood of developing a plan that works and with which everyone can live. Moreover, because each of these functional areas has been involved in formulating the plan, they will have reasonably good knowledge of the plan and more reason to work toward achieving it
Closed loop MRP:
When MRP was introduced, it did not have the capability to assess the feasibility of a proposed plan (i.e., if sufficient capacity existed at every level to achieve the plan). Thus, there was no way of knowing before executing a proposed plan if it could be achieved, or after executing the plan if it had been achieved. Consequently, a new plan had to be developed each week. When MRP II systems began to include feedback loops, they were referred to as closed-loop MRP. Closed-loop MRP systems evaluate a proposed material plan relative to available capacity. If a proposed plan is not feasible, it must be revised. The evaluation is referred to as capacity requirements planning.
Question 14: If seasonal variations are present, is their incorporation into MRP fairly simple or fairly difficult? Explain briefly.
Seasonal variations can be easily incorporated into MRP as they are requirement is