TOCICO

The concept of throughput per constraint unit (T/CU) was created at a time where the concept of a bottleneck was central. Being constrained by a bottleneck means there is a clear trade-off between production orders and products. That trade-off exists to a certain degree also when a CCR is active. When there is no CCR then the notion of T/CU has no benefit and any use of it is erroneous and generates damage. T/CU is about right only when: 1. There is an ACTIVE CCR / bottleneck and only ONE! 2. When the decision considered (a market opportunity) is relatively small – so, no new interactive constraint would emerge. a. A large market opportunity might create a new constraint. b. Giving up low T/CU products, to cover for a large opportunity with high T/CU, might reduce the overall market and actually reduce the load on the CCR to the point where it is not a CCR anymore. Taken the second condition into the real world it seems that the cases where T/CU is applicable are very few. However, the fact that T/CU looks as if it creates a valid priority between products and orders have pushed the T/CU into operations and by that harm the company’s reputation. Some also use it to focus on expanding the demand of high T/CU and by that consume the protective capacity of non-constraints – making them constraints. The use of T/CU reduced the use of the true critical information for the decision make: delta-T minus delta-OE. The inclusion of delta-OE is important because it opens the mind of the decision maker to the option to temporarily increase the capacity level of the CCR (or other resources) by overtime, outsourcing or extra-shifts. Generally speaking the S&T leads us to keep the weakest link under tight control in order not to let it become an active CCR, recognizing that growth is part of the goal and subordinating to an internal constraint does not really support growth. With this paradigm in mind – the notion of T/CU is causing too much damage.