Production Scheduling Tools to Prevent and Repair Disruptions in MRCPSP
Companies invest countless hours in planning project execution because it is a crucial component for their growth. However, regardless of all the considerations taken in the planning stage, uncertainty inherent to project execution leads to schedule disruptions, and even renders projects unfeasible. There is a vast amount of studies for generating baseline (predictive) schedules, yet, the literature regarding reactive scheduling for the Multi-Mode Resource Constrained Project Scheduling Problem (MRCPSP) is scant with only two previous studies found at the time of writing. In contrast, schedule disruption management has been thoroughly studied in the mass production environment, and regardless of the difficulties encountered, they will almost certainly be required to meet the levels planned. With this in mind, this study proposes an integrative (proactive and reactive) scheduling framework that uses the experience and methodologies developed in the production scheduling environment and apply it to the MRCPSP. The purpose of this framework is to be used on further empirical research.
KeywordsMRCPSP Proactive—Reactive scheduling Proactive scheduling Project management Project scheduling framework Reactive scheduling
This work was partially supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology Taiwan grants: [MOST103-2221-E-253-005 and MOST104-2221-E-253-002].
- 4.J.R. Turner, R. Müller, On the nature of the project as a temporary organization. Int. J. Project Manag. 21:1–8 (2003)Google Scholar
- 5.A.H.L. Chen, Y.C. Liang, J.D. Padilla, An experimental reactive scheduling framework for the multi-mode resource constrained project scheduling problem, in Lecture Notes in Engineering and Computer Science: Proceedings of the International MultiConference of Engineers and Computer Scientists 2017, pp. 853–858, Hong Kong, 15–17 March 2017Google Scholar
- 9.T. James, Control of multiclass queueing systems with abandonments and adversarial customers (Lancaster University, Thesis, 2016)Google Scholar
- 20.A.A. Bhattacharya, D. Culler, E. Friedman, A. Ghodsi, S. Shenker, I. Stoica. Hierarchical scheduling for diverse datacenter workloads. in Proceedings of the 4th Annual Symposium on Cloud Computing, p. 4. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
- 26.S. Maqsood, S. Noor, M.K. Khan, A. Wood, Hybrid genetic algorithm (GA) for job shop scheduling problems and its sensitivity analysis. Int. J. Intelligen. Syst. Technol. Appl. 11(1–2), 49–62 (2012)Google Scholar
- 35.I. Bakry, O. Moselhi, T. Zayed, Fuzzy dynamic programming for optimized scheduling of repetitive construction projects. in IFSA World Congress and NAFIPS Annual Meeting (IFSA/NAFIPS), 2013 Joint, pp. 1172–1176 (2013)Google Scholar
- 40.H. Gao, Building robust schedules using temporal protection - an empirical study of constraint based scheduling under machine failure uncertainty (University of Toronto, Thesis, 1995)Google Scholar
- 41.E. Goldratt. Critical Chain. The North River Press (1997)Google Scholar
- 42.A. Davenport, C. Gefflot, C. Beck, Slack-based techniques for robust schedules. in Sixth European Conference on Planning, pp. 43–49 (2014)Google Scholar
- 50.P. Mauguire, J.C. Billaut, C. Artigues, Grouping jobs on a single machine with heads and tails to represent a family of dominant schedules. In 8th Workshop on Project Management and Scheduling, Valencia, pp. 3–5 (2002)Google Scholar
- 57.O. Lambrechts, E. Demeulemeester, W. Herroelen, A tabu search procedure for developing robust predictive project schedules. Int. J. Product. Econom. 111(2), 496–508 (2007)Google Scholar
- 60.W. Herroelen. A Risk Integrated Methodology for Project Planning Under Uncertainty, book section 9, pp. 203–217. Springer, New York (2014)Google Scholar