Strategic Positioning of the Order Penetration Point.¶
Olhager, J. (2003). Strategic Positioning of the Order Penetration Point. International Journal of Production Economics, 85(3), 319-329.
Cited by¶
5 citations across 5 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Decoupling Point
- When the upstream regime is asked to be responsive — which it cannot be without losing efficiency — or when the downstream regime is asked to be efficient — which it cannot be without losing responsiveness — the symptom is the same: an operation suffering simultaneously from slow response and high inventory.
This sourceAnalyzes how the position of the order/decoupling point jointly fixes lead time, inventory, and customization across make-to-stock, assemble-to-order, make-to-order, and engineer-to-order strategies, and the consequences of mispositioning.
- When the upstream regime is asked to be responsive — which it cannot be without losing efficiency — or when the downstream regime is asked to be efficient — which it cannot be without losing responsiveness — the symptom is the same: an operation suffering simultaneously from slow response and high inventory.
Domain-specific¶
- Make-to-Order
- In the standard operations-management framing, MTO corresponds to placing the decoupling point — the boundary between forecast-driven and order-driven activity — at the upstream end of conversion, short of the engineer-to-order extreme: raw materials or generic intermediates are stocked against forecast demand on inputs, but all downstream conversion is triggered by the order, which specifies variant, quantity, and delivery address before production starts.
This sourceThe decoupling point as the boundary separating forecast-driven from customer-order-driven activity, and MTO as one of its standard positions.
- In the standard operations-management framing, MTO corresponds to placing the decoupling point — the boundary between forecast-driven and order-driven activity — at the upstream end of conversion, short of the engineer-to-order extreme: raw materials or generic intermediates are stocked against forecast demand on inputs, but all downstream conversion is triggered by the order, which specifies variant, quantity, and delivery address before production starts.
- Make-to-Stock
- In the standard operations-management framing, MTS places the decoupling point — the boundary between forecast-driven and order-driven activity — as far downstream as possible
This sourceThe standard operations-management treatment of the order-penetration/decoupling point, in which make-to-stock is the maximally downstream position of that boundary.
- In the standard operations-management framing, MTS places the decoupling point — the boundary between forecast-driven and order-driven activity — as far downstream as possible
Mechanisms¶
- Configuration Cell or Final Assembly Cell
- The cell earns its keep whenever downstream variety is high, differentiation can genuinely be delayed, and speed after the order matters — it is the assemble-to-order
This sourceDescribes assemble-to-order as upstream make-to-stock modules combined with downstream order-driven assembly, suited to delayed customization, delivery speed, flexibility, and recombination of modules into varied end products.
- The cell earns its keep whenever downstream variety is high, differentiation can genuinely be delayed, and speed after the order matters — it is the assemble-to-order
- Customer-Order Decoupling Point Map
- The map's strength is alignment: it makes an implicit, contested boundary explicit and shared, and it gives the concept its proper name — the customer order decoupling point
This sourceDefines the customer order decoupling point as the stage in a manufacturing value chain where a product becomes linked to a specific customer order.
- The map's strength is alignment: it makes an implicit, contested boundary explicit and shared, and it gives the concept its proper name — the customer order decoupling point
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Not recorded. Neither this nor any other of the 5 citations of this work carries a recorded support check.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:c024a174054d · see in the full table