If you are reading this blog post, you already know the difficulties of scheduling your production purely with standard Microsoft Dynamics NAV and Dynamics 365 Business Central. Working on a proper schedule is so difficult. Typically, you get lost in all these open tables that are required to get all information needed. Let’s not forget to mention the difficulties to understand the grand scheme of things when you change data. Not to speak of getting this bigger picture by comparing the impact of data changes. The fact that many NAV and Business Central users regard this task as very tedious was, by the way, confirmed by the data that comes from our State of Business Central & Manufacturing Report.
In this blog post, I shed a light on how you can ease this task with production scheduling extensions and add-ins. While doing so, I also elaborate on the differences between purely manual drag & drop production scheduling and automatic scheduling based on scheduling rules
We at NETRONIC are all about operational agility. A proven (if not: the most rewarding) technique to achieve operational agility is visual scheduling. Back in 2012, we realized missing production scheduling capabilities within Microsoft Dynamics NAV and decided to close this gap. We wanted to give manufacturing users of Dynamics NAV the option to visually manage their production schedule. Consequently, we released our first product for NAV in 2013: the Visual Production Scheduler (VPS) for Dynamics NAV.
And by the way: We still maintain the VPS for Dynamics (for all role-tailored client versions, still!). The VPS provides customers with a high-level view of their production orders, routings, and work & machine centers. It achieves an unprecedented way to achieve transparency of the production schedule. This transparency comes from visualization, which allows at the same time to sophisticate (many information) and to simplify (all in one picture). As such, the VPS gives manufacturing customers the ability to see their data side by side, making it easier to make comparisons, assumptions, and decisions.
Executing these decisions based on visual data can be done easily, using our drag and drop functionality – which until today serves as one of our most beloved and important features.
However, we did not stop with the VPS for NAV. Firstly, we have been developing an enhanced version of the Visual Production Scheduler for Dynamics 365 Business Central. Secondly, we decided to develop a "bigger brother" to the pure drag & drop visual scheduler: the Visual Advanced Production Scheduler (VAPS) is the first finite capacity scheduling extension for Dynamics 365 Business Central and adds automatic scheduling to the plate.
With that, the scene is set to compare drag & drop production scheduling with automatic production scheduling, and to advise what you should go for.
Our products allow the user to visually make changes to their production schedule. This is done by dragging & dropping operations. On standard Business Central, without a visual scheduler, this takes a lot more effort. Users have to drill into individual tables and change values (dates and times) manually without seeing the bigger picture.
The basic principles of our drag and drop scheduling include the following:
When you do any of this within standard Dynamics NAV or standard Dynamics 365 Business Central, the entire production order is rescheduled. That means, all predecessors, as well as all successors of the just changed operation, are updated as well. The Dynamics system does this in a way that there is never a gap between operations from the same production order.
Our standard drag & drop scheduling is different. By default, it treats the operation individually and does not cause any rescheduling of any other operation. With this, users have full control of what is happening.
However, we also allow the VPS to mirror the standard Dynamics NAV / 365 Business Central behavior. But, we do this a bit more focused.
With these options, users not only have more control of their operations and hence their schedule. They also can create gaps between operations from one production order - which they can't with standard Dynamics 365 Business Central.
Nevertheless, there is one relevant gap - both in the standard Dynamics system and in our drag & drop scheduler (Visual Production Scheduler) which mirrors this system. Dynamics NAV and Dynamics 365 Business Central are good for time scheduling, but they are not good when it comes to capacity scheduling. This system does not come with any reasonable kind of finite capacity scheduling.
The introduction of the Visual Advanced Production Scheduler (VAPS) in early 2020 gave us both the need and the platform to rethink drag & drop production scheduling. The VAPS is the first finite capacity scheduling extension that fully integrates into Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central. As such it closes the aforementioned gap of Business Central and enables manufacturers to do finite capacity scheduling.
The thing is: finite capacity scheduling means that a scheduling engine takes care of calculating the results of any change to the schedule. It is in the nature of a scheduling engine that it follows certain rules. Of course, these rules have to get applied when doing drag and drop scheduling as well. If not, the scheduling application would generate inconsistent results.
As logic as "applying rules" sounds, as impactful it is for the drag and drop scheduling. Applying rules means more formalism and fewer degrees of freedom. Drag and drop with a finite capacity scheduling engine still come with the two general drag directions (horizontal and vertical), however, the drop fundamentally changes. With the "drop", the user tells the system: "I want this operation to be positioned here". As now finite capacities are applied, this also means: if I position this operation here, the operation that was here before needs to get moved out.
Drag and drop scheduling combined with finite capacity scheduling always is a change of priorities. This is fundamentally different from a "pure" drag and drop scheduler.
Having this in mind, we enriched the finite capacity drag & drop scheduler with two functions:
With having a finite capacity scheduling engine in place, we also could start to implement automatic scheduling complementing the drag & drop scheduling.
When we designed our automatic scheduling system, we decided to optimize for trust (instead of optimizing for algorithmic sophistication). We wanted to build a visual scheduling software that Business Central would understand and hence would trust.
Consequently, we decided against the magic "optimize everything now" button. Instead, we developed multiple scheduling instruments.
Those scheduling instruments are meant to focus on concrete scheduling challenges. They are not meant to be magic. They are meant to be effective, efficient, and easy to understand by the user. The idea of having scheduling instruments is key to the Visual Advanced Production Scheduler. We want you to be in control of your schedule - a schedule that you trust.
These instruments are:
As you might’ve already seen from the various descriptions provided above, there is a huge difference when working with drag & drop scheduling versus automatic scheduling. Also, there is a difference between "pure" drag & drop scheduling and finite capacity drag & drop scheduling.
Pure drag & drop scheduling | Finite capacity drag & drop scheduling | Automatic scheduling | |
Makes sure the due date is not violated | No - but a violation is visually indicated | No - but a violation is visually indicated | Currently: no (but a violation is visually indicated) | can get achieved with respective scheduling algorithms |
Takes into account the routing | Yes or no - depending on how the user sets up the scheduler | Yes - always | Yes - always |
Takes into account the machines' capacity | No | Yes | Yes |
A change to one specific production order can cause changes to other production orders | No | Yes | No - if scheduling instrument is applied to just one production order |
Takes into account alternative machines | No | Yes | Yes |
Takes into account material availability | No | Yes | Yes |
Can change already started operations | No | Yes | No |
Ability to schedule several production orders at once | No | No | Yes |
In our view, and also based on our experience of more than 500 visual production scheduling implementations, the decision should not be either/or. Instead, we recommend going for a both/and approach.