Given a limited investment, we provide a general solution procedure that examines the trade-offs and that allocates that investment optimally for quality improvement and setup reduction. The paper is a generalization and an extension of Porteus [Operations Research 34, 141–143 (1986)]. We use general, continuous functions for quality improvement and for setup reduction. We find that in the face of a budget constraint, it is usually necessary to begin with either quality improvement or setup reduction, in order to bring one of these to some threshold, before joint investment should be undertaken. The contour lines of the total cost and the locus of the optimal solutions illustrate the behavior of the optimal joint investment. We also find that there could be some backtracking when the total relevant cost function for one type of option is strictly convex and is concave for the other type, i.e. a previous threshold investment in quality improvement or setup reduction may be reduced when the budget constraint is relaxed.
[1]
Jae-Dong Hong,et al.
JIT purchasing and setup reduction in an integrated inventory model
,
1992
.
[2]
Evan L. Porteus.
Investing in new parameter values in the discounted EOQ model
,
1986
.
[3]
P. Billington.
The classic economic production quantity model with setup cost as a function of capital expenditure
,
1987
.
[4]
Evan L. Porteus.
Investing in Reduced Setups in the EOQ Model
,
1985
.
[5]
Arnaldo Hernandez.
Just-In-Time Manufacturing: A Practical Approach
,
1989
.
[6]
M. Paknejad,et al.
Setup cost reduction in an inventory model with finite-range stochastic lead times
,
1990
.
[7]
Hamid Noori,et al.
Justifying new technology acquisition through its impact on the cost of running an inventory policy
,
1988
.
[8]
Evan L. Porteus.
Optimal Lot Sizing, Process Quality Improvement and Setup Cost Reduction
,
1986,
Oper. Res..