Plan for Every Part: Container, Address, Frequency and Source

Why it matters

A plan for every part turns the bill of materials into a transport decision. This record, called PFEP for short, does not contain only the part name and the quantity in the warehouse. It holds the source, the point of use, the consumption rate, the container quantity and the replenishment interval in one relationship. If the part is in the warehouse and yet the line is waiting, the problem may not be a total stock shortage. A wrong delivery address, an unsuitable container or a late signal can produce the same result. The purpose of the plan is not to hide these different causes behind a single stock total. When it is known which decision each field feeds, a verifiable replenishment definition emerges instead of superfluous columns.

A part can be used at different stations. For this reason the basic record key is in most cases the combination of the part code and the point of use. If the source can change, the valid source and the condition for changing it are stated too. The total consumption of a part can be useful for purchasing; but the transport task must say what is to be left at which point. Splitting containers that carry the same code across different points prevents wrong deliveries. The point of use must be physically recognizable. The place where an employee happens to stand that day does not count as an address. When the layout changes, whether the old definition remains valid is reviewed separately; record accuracy does not maintain itself.

Consumption rate and replenishment interval are separate data. Consumption can change with the product sequence and the operating conditions; the interval, on the other hand, is a commitment of the transport system. Their product gives the interval demand. The protection quantity is added explicitly for uncertainty; surplus without a rationale does not provide reliability. The container quantity converts this need into a physical transport unit. If replenishment is done with full containers, the result is rounded up. Even so, whether the containers fit the available space, are held securely and protect the right material is tested separately. A numerically sufficient number of containers does not by itself mean a physically workable delivery.

This plan is the shared data foundation of the following lessons. The milk run source and stops, and the line-side calculation, use the consumption and container information. When separate teams work with different consumption figures, the route and the stock decision drift apart. A single valid version, a change date and a record owner are needed for this reason. Preparing the record does not mean filling every gap at a desk with guesses. A value that is not verified at its source stays unknown; the decision it stops is written down. A good plan is not so much one that looks complete as one that makes a wrong assumption visible. That way the definition itself can be tested before a replenishment problem is blamed on a person. The distribution of responsibility should show not whom the record belongs to but who verifies which field. This way a change request reaches the right person and an uncertainty does not stay open for long.

Formula