Skip to main content
Log in

Evaluation of Plant Focus Strategies: A Continuous Approximation Framework

  • Published:
Annals of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The concept of plant focus emphasizes a firm's ability to increase productivity and lower cost by limiting the number and variety of operations at its production lines. In this paper, we present a quantitative modeling framework to analyze the choice between product focus and market focus strategies. We also study the effect of flexible manufacturing technology on plant focus. Our methodology is based on a facility design model that uses continuous functions in representing the spatial distribution of demand and cost parameters. One of the advantages of this approach is its ability to generate closed-form solutions with relatively little data. Furthermore, it enables us derive several managerial insights into plant focus decisions as well as the impact of technology alternatives on these decisions. Finally, continuous approximation approach has potential to complement more detailed mixed integer models.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Beckenbach, F.E. and R. Bellman. (1961). Inequalities. Springer-Verlag: Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benjaafar, S. and D. Gupta. (1998). “Scope Versus Focus: Issues of Flexibility, Capacity, and the Number of Production Facilities,” IIE Transactions 30, 413–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Billington, A.C. and T.C. Davis. (1992). “Manufacturing Strategy Analysis: Models and Practice.” OMEGA International Journal of Management Science 20, 587–595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burns, D. L, R.W. Hall, D. Blumenfeld, and C.F. Daganzo. (1985). “Distribution Strategies that Minimize Transportation and Inventory Costs.” Operations Research 33, 469–490.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buzacott, A.J. (1999). “The Structure of Manufacturing Systems: Insights on the Impact of Variability,” International Journal of Flexible Manufacturing Systems 11, 127–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, A.M. and S. Moon. (1991). “An Integrated Plant Loading Model with Economies of Scale and Scope.” European Journal of Operational Research 50, 266–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daganzo, F. C. (1999). Logistics Systems Analysis. Springer-Verlag: Berlin Heidelberg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dasci, A. (2001). “Discrete and Continuous Models for Production-Distribution Systems.” PhD thesis, McGill University.

  • Dasci, A. and V. Verter. (2001a). “A Continuous Model for Production-Distribution System Design Problem.” European Journal of Operational Research 129, 287–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dasci, A. and V. Verter. (2001b). “The Plant Location and Technology Acquisition Problem.” IIE Transactions 33, 963–973.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erlebacher, J.S. and R.D. Meller. (2000). “The Interaction of Location and Inventory in Designing Distribution Systems.” IIE Transactions 32, 155–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erlenkotter, D. (1989). “The General Market Area Model.” Annals of Operations Research 18, 45–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fine, H.C. and R.M. Freund. (1990). “Optimal Investment in Product-Flexible Manufacturing Capacity.” Management Science 36, 449–466.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geoffrion, M.A. (1979). “Making Better use of Optimization Capability in Distribution System Planning.” AIIE Transactions 11, 96–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, W.R. (1993). “Design for Local Area Freight Networks.” Transportation Research B 27B, 79–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, H.R. and S.C. Wheelwright. (1984). Restoring Our Competitive Edge. New York: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klincewicz, G.J. and H. Luss. (1987). “A Dual Based Algorithm for Multiproduct Uncapacitated Facility Location.” Transportation Science 21, 198–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langevin, A., P. Mbaraga, and J.F. Campbell. (1996). “Continuous Approximation Models in Freight Distribution: An Overview. Transportation Research B 30, 163–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, S. and D. Tirupati. (1994). “Dynamic Capacity Expansion Problem with Multiple Products: Technology Selection and Timing of Capacity Additions.” Operations Research 42, 958–976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, G.J. and A.V. Roth. (1994). “A Taxonomy of Manufacturing Strategies.” Management Science 40, 285–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newell. F.G. (1973). “Scheduling, Location, Transportation, and Continuum Mechanics; some Simple Approximations to Optimization Problems.” SIAM Journal of Applied Mathematics 25, 346–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenfield, B. D., I. Engelstein, and D. Feigenbaum. (1992). “An Application of Sizing Service Territories.” European Journal of Operational Research 63, 164–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmenner, W.R. (1982). Making Business Location Decisions. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, W. (1974). “The Focused Factory.” Harvard Business Review May-June, 113–121.

  • Suzuki, T., Y. Asami, and A. Okabe. (1991). “Sequential Location-Allocation of Public Facilities in One- and Two-Dimensional Space: Comparison of Several Policies.” Mathematical Programming 52, 125–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Mieghem, A.J. (1998). “Investment Strategies for Flexible Resources.” Management Science 44, 1071–1078.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verter, V. and A. Dasci. (2002). “The Plant Location and Flexible Technology Acquisition Problem.” European Journal of Operational Research 136, 366–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warszawski, A. (1973). “Multi-Dimensional Location Problems.” Operational Research Quarterly 24, 165–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott W. and A. Gupta. (1995). “The General Optimal Market Area Model with Uncertain and Nonstationary Demand.” Location Science 3, 25–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abdullah Dasci.

Additional information

This research was partially funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Council of Canada (OGP 183631) and the Canada Research Chair in Distribution Management at HEC Montreal. Both authors are affiliated with the Center for Research on Transportation, which provided an excellent environment for collaboration. Three anynomuous referees and Gilbert Laporte, the guest co-editor, provided very helpful comments on an earlier draft of the paper.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dasci, A., Verter, V. Evaluation of Plant Focus Strategies: A Continuous Approximation Framework. Ann Oper Res 136, 303–327 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-005-2061-1

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-005-2061-1

Keywords

Navigation