3 ways to divide your business for better use of APS

When one begins to think about the implementation of an APS solution, one of the first doubts that are presented is: “Should we share the company into different modeling? And how do we do this?” Well, first, should we discuss what a modeling is? We call modeling a unit independent of the APS system. Thus, as in mathematical problems we modeled a real problem and turn it into a theoretical problem, but instead of writing a mathematical expression, we do this using the APS system. As well as complex production chains within the same company, the division of APS modeling can directly influence the quality and adherence of the solution. Therefore, it is always important to discuss the positive and negative impacts of each architecture that we will adopt. The great trade that takes place in this part of the project is the more we separate the modeling, the holistic view of the factory becomes impaired, but the more we group the more complex modeling the solution is. For exemplifying, we separated 3 types of modeling divisions: 1 - PHYSICAL DIVISION THIS IS THE MOST NATURAL OF ALL and often happens without discussion. Imagine the example of a company that is headquartered in Porto Alegre and São Paulo. Originally, these two headquarters will each have a programmer, with their programming rules, their specific parameters and other basic differences. To give proper independence to both plants, it may be interesting that independent modeling is archived for each. 2 - Division by parallel process now let's imagine that this same company produces two types of products (pen and pencil). It may be interesting to separate each type of product into a modeling, even if it is produced at the same headquarters. But be very careful when performing this step, we have to satisfy a basic premise of sequencing: the same resource can only be sequenced by a modeling. That is, the machines that produce the pen components, will not produce the pencil components, so we guarantee that the flow of each type of product does not mix with the flow of the other. 3 - Division by process in series Another example that is quite common is to have a modeling by production step. For example, if our pens factory would be separated in the assembly and packaging sector. This division can make a lot of sense to give independence to the processes, but it also requires that there is a procedural division between these two sectors, for example: a stock of pens assembled for the packaging sector. In such cases, it can be a great gain to group these sectors to have a flow view of the production order and the impact of a programming change in the other process. So, as we can see it is possible to draw the solution in various ways for an APS deployment project, showing how flexible and adaptable to the various productive chains allied with market experience. Now tell us, what would be the best architecture for yours? [NOPTIN-Form ID = 2822]