7. Production Logistics and Materials Flow

Introduction and Context

Production logistics concerns the planning, movement, storage, control, and synchronization of materials, components, information, and finished goods throughout the production system. It connects suppliers with manufacturing operations and connects manufacturing with customers. Whereas traditional logistics often emphasized transportation and warehousing, production logistics focuses on ensuring that the right material reaches the right point of use, in the right quantity, at the right time, with minimum disruption and waste.

In a modern supply chain, materials flow is not an isolated factory activity. Supplier reliability, purchasing policies, inventory records, production capacity, scheduling rules, shop-floor layout, quality performance, transport arrangements, and customer demand are interdependent. A production schedule that ignores supplier lead times may be infeasible. Conversely, a purchasing system that optimizes purchase price while creating excess inventory may increase total supply-chain cost.

The central managerial challenge is therefore coordination. Production logistics must balance responsiveness, utilization, inventory investment, delivery reliability, quality, and cost. This chapter examines the principal systems and methods used to coordinate that balance, including material requirements planning (MRP), enterprise resource planning (ERP), capacity planning, production scheduling, just-in-time (JIT), Kanban, the theory of constraints, line feeding, and inbound and outbound materials management.

Learning Objectives

After studying this chapter, the reader should be able to:

1. Explain the role of production logistics in an integrated supply chain.

2. Describe how bills of material, master production schedules, MRP, and ERP coordinate materials and information.

3. Distinguish material planning from capacity planning and production scheduling.

4. Apply the principles of JIT, Kanban, and the theory of constraints.

5. Design appropriate line-feeding and inbound-materials practices.

6. Evaluate outbound materials flows and their relationship with customer service.

7. Identify operational risks, performance measures, technology applications, and implementation challenges.

Production Logistics as a Coordinating System

Production logistics has three simultaneous flows. The first is the physical flow of raw materials, components, work-in-process, packaging, and finished goods. The second is the information flow consisting of forecasts, orders, inventory records, schedules, production confirmations, quality data, and shipment instructions. The third is the control flow through which decisions about priorities, quantities, timing, and exceptions are communicated.

A useful distinction is between push and pull coordination. In a push system, planned demand and forecasts generate production and material movements. MRP is a classic push-oriented planning logic. In a pull system, downstream consumption authorizes replenishment. Kanban is a practical pull mechanism. Most industrial systems combine both: MRP plans procurement and longer-horizon production, while pull signals control short-cycle replenishment at the shop floor.

The performance of a materials-flow system is determined not merely by the quantity of inventory but by its location, timing, accuracy, and usability. Inventory held at the wrong point can be as damaging as inventory shortage. For example, an assembly line may stop even when the plant possesses sufficient total stock if the required component is stored in the wrong warehouse, has not been inspected, or cannot be identified in the system.

Important objectives include continuity of production, short and predictable throughput time, low material-handling cost, high inventory accuracy, prevention of damage and obsolescence, efficient use of space, traceability, and reliable customer delivery. These objectives may conflict. High utilization of every machine may increase queues and delay orders; large safety stocks may protect against uncertainty but conceal poor process capability.

The Planning Architecture: From Demand to Material Release

Demand, the Master Production Schedule, and the Bill of Material

The planning process begins with independent demand, such as customer orders or forecasts. This demand is translated into a master production schedule (MPS), which specifies what finished products or major assemblies are to be completed, in what quantities, and during which time periods. The MPS must be realistic: it should reflect available capacity, inventory policies, customer priorities, and known supply constraints.

The bill of material (BOM) defines the hierarchical relationship between a finished product and its assemblies, subassemblies, components, and raw materials. A single-level BOM lists immediate components; a multilevel BOM represents the complete product structure. Accurate quantities, units of measure, engineering revisions, scrap allowances, and effective dates are essential. An inaccurate BOM produces systematically inaccurate procurement and production requirements.

Material Requirements Planning

MRP converts the MPS into time-phased requirements for dependent-demand items. Its principal inputs are the MPS, BOM, inventory records, and planning parameters such as lead times, lot-sizing rules, scheduled receipts, safety stocks, and order policies. The basic logic is to determine gross requirements, subtract available inventory and scheduled receipts, calculate net requirements, and offset planned orders by their lead times.

For a component, the relationship can be expressed conceptually as:

Net requirement = Gross requirement − Available inventory − Scheduled receipts + Allocated or protected quantities

If a net requirement exists, MRP creates a planned order receipt. The receipt is then shifted backward by the item’s lead time to determine the planned order release. In a multilevel product, the release of a parent order generates gross requirements for its children.

MRP is particularly effective where demand is dependent, products have complex structures, and lead times can be estimated. It provides visibility of future requirements and helps coordinate purchasing with production. However, its recommendations are only as reliable as its data and assumptions. Inaccurate inventory balances, unrealistic lead times, obsolete BOMs, unstable schedules, and unrecorded scrap can make an MRP system produce frequent rescheduling messages without improving performance.

ERP and Integrated Planning

Enterprise resource planning (ERP) extends the planning logic across functions. Finance, purchasing, sales, engineering, production, quality, maintenance, warehousing, and distribution may use a common database and transaction structure. ERP can connect a customer order to a production order, material reservation, purchase order, quality inspection, inventory movement, cost record, and shipment.

Integration does not eliminate managerial judgment. It creates shared visibility, but poor master data or poorly designed workflows are simply disseminated more quickly. Effective ERP governance therefore requires ownership of item masters, BOMs, routings, work centers, lead times, units of measure, supplier records, and inventory transactions. Change control is especially important when engineering revisions affect material requirements.

Capacity Planning and Production Scheduling

Material availability alone does not guarantee that production can be completed. Capacity planning evaluates whether labor, machines, tools, space, utilities, and supplier resources can support the planned workload. It is commonly conducted at several levels.

• Resource planning examines long-term requirements for facilities, equipment, and labor.
• Rough-cut capacity planning tests whether the MPS is feasible at critical work centers.
• Capacity requirements planning (CRP) translates planned orders into detailed workload by work center and time period.
• Finite-capacity scheduling prevents the schedule from assigning more work than a resource can perform.

A basic capacity relationship is:

Required capacity = Σ (Processing time per unit × Planned quantity) + Setup time

Available capacity must be adjusted for shifts, breaks, planned maintenance, absenteeism, efficiency, and quality losses. A work center operating at nominal capacity may have considerably less effective capacity.

Production scheduling determines sequence and timing. Scheduling decisions include order release, machine assignment, batch size, setup sequence, due-date priority, dispatching rules, and coordination with material availability. Common rules include first-come-first-served, earliest due date, shortest processing time, and critical-ratio priority. No single rule is universally best. Shortest processing time can reduce average flow time but may delay large or urgent orders; earliest due date protects delivery performance but may increase setups.

A schedule should be treated as a control instrument rather than an unquestionable promise. Excessive schedule changes create nervousness, expedite costs, and confusion on the shop floor. A practical system establishes a frozen zone, in which changes are restricted, and a flexible zone, in which adjustments are permitted according to defined rules.

JIT, Pull Control, and Kanban

Just-in-time (JIT) is an operating philosophy that seeks to provide materials and production outputs close to the time they are needed, while exposing and removing sources of waste. Its aim is not simply minimal inventory. JIT depends on stable processes, short setups, reliable suppliers, preventive maintenance, standardized work, quality at source, visual control, and employee problem-solving.

The classic wastes addressed by JIT include overproduction, waiting, transportation, excess processing, inventory, motion, and defects. Later interpretations also recognize underuse of employee capability and avoidable environmental impact. Reducing inventory without improving process reliability can merely transfer problems into line stoppages and emergency shipments.

Kanban is a signaling method that authorizes production or movement based on downstream consumption. A kanban may be a card, container, electronic message, barcode scan, or other approved signal. In a two-bin system, consumption of the first bin triggers replenishment while the second bin supports continued use. Kanban is most suitable for repetitive demand, relatively stable processes, standard containers, and short replenishment cycles.

A simplified kanban quantity formula is:

Number of kanbans = (Demand during replenishment lead time × (1 + safety factor)) / Container quantity

The result is normally rounded upward. If demand or lead time rises, more kanbans may be required; if process capability improves, the safety factor can be reduced. Kanban should not be used to conceal unreliable suppliers, inaccurate consumption records, or excessive variation. It is a control loop, not a substitute for root-cause improvement.

The Theory of Constraints and Flow Management

The theory of constraints (TOC) views every system as limited by at least one constraint that restricts its overall throughput. A constraint may be a machine, labor skill, policy, supplier, market condition, or information rule. The five focusing steps are:

1. Identify the system’s constraint.

2. Exploit the constraint by using it as effectively as possible.

3. Subordinate other activities to the constraint’s requirements.

4. Elevate the constraint by adding or improving capacity.

5. Return to the first step when the constraint moves.

TOC emphasizes throughput, inventory, and operating expense. A non-bottleneck should not be optimized independently if its output merely increases work-in-process before the constraint. The drum-buffer-rope concept expresses this logic: the constraint sets the pace (drum), a protective buffer prevents starvation, and a release signal (rope) limits the introduction of work.

TOC and JIT are complementary but not identical. JIT seeks smooth, waste-free flow and low inventories; TOC gives explicit priority to the system constraint. In a variable environment, a plant may use MRP for medium-term planning, finite scheduling for capacity feasibility, and TOC controls for daily release decisions around a bottleneck.

Line Feeding and Internal Materials Movement

Line feeding is the controlled delivery of materials from stores or supermarkets to the point of use. Its design affects operator productivity, ergonomics, line-side inventory, space, and production continuity. The objective is to separate value-adding assembly work from searching, walking, counting, unpacking, and material-handling tasks.

Common methods include:

• Bulk delivery, in which larger quantities are delivered less frequently. It is simple but can consume space and obscure shortages.
• Batch or route delivery, in which a materials handler follows a planned route and replenishes several stations.
• Kit feeding, in which components required for a particular order or product variant are grouped together.
• Point-of-use delivery, in which standardized containers are replenished directly at the workstation.
• Line-side supermarkets, where controlled quantities are held near production and replenished from a central store.

A good line-feeding design considers consumption rate, part size, product variety, replenishment frequency, container standards, ergonomic reach, forklift and pedestrian safety, traceability, and emergency access. High-variation assembly may benefit from kitting, while repetitive high-volume production often benefits from small standardized containers and frequent milk runs.

Line-side stock should be deliberately limited and visually controlled. Excess material may create obstruction, mix-ups, damage, and hidden shortages. Too little material may cause repeated emergency deliveries. The correct level depends on replenishment reliability and consumption variability rather than a universal rule.

Inbound Materials Management

Inbound management begins before a shipment arrives. It includes supplier scheduling, purchase-order communication, transport coordination, advance shipping information, receiving, identification, inspection, put-away, and release to production. The receiving dock is a control point, not merely a storage entrance.

Supplier collaboration is especially important for critical or long-lead items. Organizations may use delivery windows, supplier schedules, supplier portals, electronic data interchange, vendor-managed inventory, consignment stock, or supplier development. These practices require clear ownership of inventory, quality responsibilities, forecast commitments, and liability for shortages or obsolescence.

Receiving processes should verify quantity, item identity, packaging condition, documentation, lot or serial information, and required quality status. Barcode and radio-frequency identification technologies can reduce manual entry and improve traceability, but they cannot compensate for poor labeling or uncontrolled exceptions. Materials should be directed promptly to quarantine, storage, line-side supermarkets, or production according to their status.

Inbound performance should be assessed through more than purchase price. Relevant measures include supplier on-time delivery, delivery completeness, lead-time variability, incoming defect rate, dock-to-stock time, premium freight, packaging damage, and supplier responsiveness. Total cost may rise when low-price suppliers require frequent expediting, inspection, or excess safety stock.

Outbound Materials Management

Outbound materials management covers the movement of completed products from the production point through finished-goods storage, order processing, picking, packing, staging, dispatch, and delivery. Its central requirement is alignment between production completion and customer demand. Producing early may increase finished-goods inventory and obsolescence; producing late may damage customer service.

Warehouse and dispatch design should support product identification, order accuracy, appropriate stock rotation, packaging protection, load consolidation, carrier coordination, and shipment traceability. First-in-first-out is useful for many products, while expiry-sensitive materials may require first-expiry-first-out. Serial and lot control is essential where safety, warranty, regulatory, or recall requirements apply.

The outbound process should be connected to customer-order status and production progress. Available-to-promise and capable-to-promise methods help sales and operations teams provide delivery commitments based on inventory and feasible capacity. Exception management is critical: a delayed production order, quality hold, or transport disruption should trigger a coordinated response rather than isolated departmental action.

Technology, Analytics, and Digital Control

Digital production logistics commonly combines ERP, manufacturing execution systems (MES), warehouse management systems (WMS), transportation management systems (TMS), barcode scanning, RFID, Internet of Things sensors, and dashboard analytics. ERP coordinates enterprise transactions; MES records and controls shop-floor execution; WMS manages storage and movements; TMS supports carrier and transport decisions.

Real-time data can improve inventory accuracy, locate containers, identify bottlenecks, and predict material shortages. Predictive analytics may use consumption patterns, supplier performance, machine condition, and lead-time variability to improve safety-stock or replenishment decisions. Artificial intelligence can assist demand sensing, schedule optimization, anomaly detection, and route planning. However, decisions must remain explainable where they affect customer commitments, worker safety, supplier evaluation, or regulatory compliance.

Digitalization introduces risks: cyberattacks, unauthorized transactions, poor data governance, algorithmic bias, system outages, and overconfidence in dashboards. Resilient systems require access controls, backups, segregation of duties, cybersecurity training, tested recovery procedures, and clear fallback processes for manual operation.

Performance Measurement and Managerial Trade-offs

Production logistics should be evaluated through a balanced set of measures. Typical indicators include inventory turnover, days of supply, stockout frequency, schedule adherence, order-fill rate, on-time-in-full delivery, throughput time, dock-to-stock time, picking accuracy, line stoppage minutes, expedited freight, capacity utilization, and forecast or schedule accuracy.

Measures must be interpreted together. High equipment utilization may coexist with poor delivery performance if work is released faster than the system can process it. Low inventory may reflect excellent flow or dangerous understocking. A useful performance system therefore links local measures to end-to-end outcomes and distinguishes causes from symptoms.

Managers must continually negotiate trade-offs. Larger batches reduce setup frequency but increase work-in-process. More safety stock protects service but ties up capital. Dedicated line-side stock improves accessibility but consumes space. A supplier with long transport distance may offer lower unit cost but higher disruption exposure. The appropriate decision depends on total cost, risk, strategic importance, and customer requirements.

Illustrative Case: Stabilizing Materials Flow at Orion Components

Background

Orion Components, a fictional manufacturer of industrial control panels, produces several product variants on a shared assembly line. Its ERP system generated weekly MRP recommendations, but the plant experienced frequent shortages of connectors, fasteners, and wiring kits. At the same time, the stores area was crowded and contained large quantities of slow-moving items.

Situation and Problem

Customer delivery performance had fallen, overtime was rising, and line operators regularly left their stations to search for components. Production planners responded by expediting orders and increasing batch sizes. These actions increased inventory but did not eliminate shortages. Investigation showed that inventory records were inaccurate, engineering revisions were not consistently reflected in BOMs, and a final testing station was the effective bottleneck.

Analysis

The plant mapped the physical and information flows. It found that materials were received into a general area without immediate status identification. Line-side quantities were not standardized, and operators often withdrew material without recording consumption. The MRP system therefore planned against unreliable balances. Capacity analysis showed that final testing had less effective capacity than assumed because of frequent changeovers and rework.

Approach and Solution

Orion introduced cycle counting for high-value and high-risk items, corrected BOMs and units of measure, and established engineering-change control. A supermarket was created near assembly, with standard containers and electronic replenishment signals. A scheduled milk run delivered components to line-side points several times per shift. High-variation products were supplied through kits, while common fasteners used two-bin Kanban.

The plant also created a finite schedule for the testing constraint, reduced changeover time through standardized test fixtures, and established a buffer before testing. MRP continued to plan purchased items and longer-horizon requirements, while Kanban controlled short-cycle internal replenishment. A daily cross-functional meeting reviewed shortages, quality holds, supplier delays, and constraint status.

Outcome

As an illustrative case, Orion’s principal improvement was not the purchase of new software but the integration of accurate data, capacity-aware scheduling, disciplined material signals, and clear ownership. Line-side searching decreased, emergency purchasing became less frequent, and planners gained greater confidence in MRP outputs. The case also demonstrated that reducing inventory should follow process stabilization; otherwise, shortages simply become more visible.

Learning Points

The case highlights five lessons: material planning depends on master-data quality; capacity constraints must shape schedules; pull systems work best with stable processes; line feeding should protect operator productivity; and performance improvement requires coordinated action across purchasing, stores, production, engineering, quality, and logistics.

Challenges, Risks, and Common Mistakes

Several implementation errors recur across organizations. Treating ERP as a substitute for process discipline creates unreliable records. Increasing safety stock without analyzing root causes hides supplier, quality, and scheduling problems. Applying Kanban to highly erratic demand can create either shortages or excessive cards. Maximizing utilization at every work center can produce queues and long lead times. Releasing work without regard to the bottleneck increases work-in-process. Excessive schedule changes weaken credibility and encourage local expedites.

Other risks include poor ergonomics in line feeding, unsafe mixed traffic between forklifts and pedestrians, damage caused by unsuitable packaging, loss of traceability through unrecorded substitutions, and dependence on a single supplier without a continuity plan. Contingency planning should address alternate sources, substitute materials, critical tooling, transport disruption, cyber incidents, and recovery priorities.

Ethical, Governance, and Professional Considerations

Materials-flow decisions affect workers, suppliers, customers, and the environment. Managers should not use unrealistic schedules to conceal capacity shortages or pressure employees into unsafe handling practices. Supplier evaluation should be evidence-based and free from improper conflicts of interest. Traceability and recall capability are professional responsibilities where products can affect health, safety, or critical infrastructure.

Governance also requires transparent inventory ownership, authorized engineering changes, segregation of purchasing and receiving duties, and auditable transaction records. Packaging reduction, route consolidation, reusable containers, energy-efficient warehouses, and responsible disposal can reduce environmental impact, but sustainability claims should be supported by measurable evidence rather than superficial reporting.

Emerging Directions and Best Practices

Production logistics is moving toward more connected, demand-responsive, and resilient operating models. Digital twins can simulate material flows and capacity alternatives before physical changes are made. Autonomous mobile robots may support transport in controlled environments, while computer vision can assist identification and inventory counting. Control towers can combine supplier, production, inventory, and transport data to prioritize exceptions.

The most durable practices remain managerial as well as technological:

• Maintain accurate, governed master data.
• Integrate demand, material, capacity, and scheduling decisions.
• Protect bottlenecks and release work according to system capacity.
• Use pull signals for repetitive, stable replenishment.
• Standardize containers, routes, labels, and work instructions.
• Build supplier capability and visibility rather than relying only on expediting.
• Measure end-to-end service, flow, quality, cost, and risk.
• Improve processes before merely reducing inventory.
• Design safety, traceability, cybersecurity, and continuity into the system.

Chapter Summary

Production logistics coordinates the physical, information, and control flows that connect suppliers, production operations, warehouses, and customers. MRP transforms the master production schedule and BOM into time-phased material requirements, while ERP integrates these activities with enterprise transactions. Capacity planning and scheduling test and sequence feasible work; they prevent material plans from becoming operationally unrealistic.

JIT and Kanban reduce waste and support consumption-based replenishment when processes are stable. The theory of constraints directs managerial attention to the resource that limits system throughput. Line feeding, inbound receiving, and outbound distribution translate planning decisions into reliable physical movement. Digital systems improve visibility and control but require accurate data, governance, cybersecurity, and human judgment. Effective production logistics balances service, inventory, capacity, cost, safety, resilience, and sustainability rather than optimizing one measure in isolation.

Key Terms

Production logistics: Planning and control of materials, information, and movement within and around production.

Materials flow: Physical movement of raw materials, components, work-in-process, and finished goods.

Master production schedule (MPS): Time-phased plan for producing finished products or major assemblies.

Bill of material (BOM): Structured listing of components and quantities required to make a product.

Material requirements planning (MRP): System that calculates dependent material requirements and planned order releases.

Enterprise resource planning (ERP): Integrated information system connecting major organizational functions.

Capacity planning: Assessment of whether resources can perform planned work.

Production scheduling: Assignment of work to resources with specified timing and sequence.

JIT: Operating philosophy focused on producing and replenishing close to the time of need while eliminating waste.

Kanban: Visual or electronic signal authorizing replenishment based on consumption.

Theory of constraints (TOC): Approach that improves system performance by managing its limiting constraint.

Bottleneck: Resource whose limited capacity restricts overall throughput.

Line feeding: Delivery of materials to production workstations or points of use.

Milk run: Planned route that collects or delivers materials at regular intervals.

Kitting: Grouping components required for a specific order, operation, or product.

Safety stock: Inventory held to protect against uncertainty in demand, supply, or lead time.

Finite-capacity scheduling: Scheduling that does not assign more work than available resource capacity.

Traceability: Ability to track an item’s identity, origin, status, movement, and use.

On-time-in-full (OTIF): Delivery measure assessing whether the correct quantity arrives at the promised time.

Master data: Foundational records such as items, BOMs, routings, suppliers, lead times, and work centers.

Review Questions

Short Answer Questions

1. What are the three flows coordinated by production logistics?

2. How does a BOM support MRP calculations?

3. Distinguish push planning from pull replenishment.

4. What is the purpose of a line-side supermarket?

5. Why is capacity planning necessary even when materials are available?

Long Answer Questions

1. Explain the relationship among the MPS, BOM, inventory records, MRP, and ERP.

2. Discuss how JIT and Kanban can reduce waste, and identify the conditions required for their successful use.

3. Describe the five focusing steps of the theory of constraints and explain their implications for production scheduling.

4. Compare bulk delivery, milk-run delivery, kitting, and point-of-use line feeding.

5. Explain how inbound and outbound materials management influence customer service and total supply-chain cost.

Analytical / Application Questions

1. A plant has high total inventory but frequent assembly-line shortages. Analyze the likely causes and propose a coordinated improvement plan.

2. A bottleneck testing station is overloaded while upstream machines remain highly utilized. Using TOC and capacity-planning principles, recommend changes to release and scheduling policies.

3. A firm wants to replace MRP entirely with Kanban despite highly variable demand and long supplier lead times. Evaluate the proposal and design a more suitable hybrid system.

22. Multiple Choice Questions with Answers

Question 1

Which input combination is most directly required for conventional MRP calculations?

A. MPS, BOM, inventory records, and planning parameters

B. Only customer complaints and carrier schedules

C. Machine utilization and employee satisfaction data

D. Warehouse layout and finished-goods packaging designs

Correct Answer: A. MPS, BOM, inventory records, and planning parameters

Question 2

A production plan requires 500 components, 120 are available, and 80 are scheduled to arrive. Ignoring safety stock and allocations, what is the net requirement?

A. 300

B. 380

C. 420

D. 700

Correct Answer: A. 300

Question 3

What is the primary purpose of finite-capacity scheduling?

A. To maximize purchase price discounts

B. To prevent assignments exceeding available resource capacity

C. To eliminate all safety stock

D. To replace the bill of material

Correct Answer: B. To prevent assignments exceeding available resource capacity

Question 4

Which situation is most suitable for Kanban replenishment?

A. Highly erratic demand and unreliable lead times

B. Stable repetitive demand with standardized containers

C. One-time engineering prototypes

D. Materials with unknown identity and quantity

Correct Answer: B. Stable repetitive demand with standardized containers

Question 5

Under the theory of constraints, what should managers do first?

A. Increase inventory at every work center

B. Identify the system constraint

C. Maximize utilization of all non-bottlenecks

D. Remove all production schedules

Correct Answer: B. Identify the system constraint

Question 6

A line-side supermarket primarily supports which activity?

A. Controlled replenishment of materials near production

B. Long-term storage of obsolete products

C. Supplier financial auditing

D. Final customer invoicing

Correct Answer: A. Controlled replenishment of materials near production

Question 7

Why can increasing batch sizes worsen production logistics performance?

A. It always reduces machine availability to zero

B. It may reduce setups but increase work-in-process and flow time

C. It eliminates all dependent demand

D. It prevents the use of ERP systems

Correct Answer: B. It may reduce setups but increase work-in-process and flow time

Question 8

Which practice most directly improves the reliability of MRP outputs?

A. Suppressing inventory adjustments

B. Maintaining accurate BOMs, inventory records, and lead times

C. Increasing emergency freight

D. Allowing unrecorded material substitutions

Correct Answer: B. Maintaining accurate BOMs, inventory records, and lead times

Question 9

In the illustrative Orion case, what was the effective production constraint?

A. The receiving dock

B. The finished-goods warehouse

C. The final testing station

D. The purchasing department

Correct Answer: C. The final testing station

Question 10

Which measure best evaluates whether a customer received the correct quantity at the promised time?

A. Overall equipment effectiveness only

B. Inventory turnover only

C. On-time-in-full delivery

D. Number of engineering changes

Correct Answer: C. On-time-in-full delivery