Question 22

Schedule changes per period best measures master-schedule stability.

This metric provides a direct assessment of how often the master schedule is altered, indicating its stability. A lower frequency of schedule changes suggests a more stable and reliable planning process.

A) Schedule changes per period

This option is correct because it directly quantifies the frequency of adjustments made to the master schedule. Frequent changes can signify instability, while fewer changes indicate a more stable scheduling environment, making this the most effective metric for evaluation.

B) Average inventory turnover

Average inventory turnover measures how quickly inventory is sold and replaced over a specific period. While it relates to operational efficiency, it does not provide insight into the stability of the master schedule itself, thus making it an irrelevant metric for this specific evaluation.

C) Percentage of orders delivered on time

This option assesses the effectiveness of the fulfillment process rather than the stability of the master schedule. Timely deliveries can be influenced by various factors outside of schedule changes, so it does not serve as a reliable indicator of scheduling stability.

D) Capacity utilisation rate

Capacity utilisation rate reflects how well a company is using its production capacity. Although it is important for operational efficiency, it does not measure how stable the master schedule is, as this metric focuses more on production capabilities than on scheduling stability.

Conclusion

The best measure of master-schedule stability is the frequency of schedule changes per period, as it directly reflects how stable the scheduling process is. Other options, while relevant to different aspects of operational performance, do not provide the necessary insights into the master schedule's consistency and reliability. Thus, they fail to address the core concept being tested effectively.