快时尚品牌产品开发流程对时间绩效的影响

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

针对快时尚产品开发流程的时间绩效问题，以快时尚品牌S为实际案例，对产品开发流程进行系统动力学建模，构建了仿真实验平台。采用“战略—资源—绩效”的基本框架，对流程的7个主要变量进行资源配置的仿真实验，预测了周期时间、准交率和平均产能等3个关键绩效指标（Key Performance Indicator, KPI）的仿真估计值。使用局部灵敏度分析和熵值法，确定周期时间、准交率和平均产能等KPI指标的权重系数，分别为53.5%、2.7%和43.4%。根据权重系数和S品牌的时间竞争战略，对流程的时间绩效进行综合评价。研究发现，批量、服装设计速率、面料重复使用率和面料生产速率等变量对流程的时间绩效影响较大。当S品牌的企划确认批量减少约25%时，整体时间绩效最优。

关键词: 绩效评价, 流程优化, 系统动力学, 快时尚品牌, 局部灵敏度

Abstract:

To solve the issue of time performance in fast fashion product development process, this paper constructs a system dynamics model of product development process based on the practical case of a fast fashion brand S, and build a simulation experiment platform. With the basic framework “strategy-resources-performance”, the simulation experiments of resource allocation are carried about 7 key variables in process, and the simulation estimated values of three key performance indicators (KPI), such as cycle time, delivery rate and MEAN flow, are forecasted. Using local sensitivity and entropy method, weight coefficients of cycle time, delivery rate and MEAN flow are recognized as 53.5%、2.7% and 43.4%. According to weight coefficients and time-based competition strategy of brand S, time performance of process is evaluated comprehensively. The research shows that variables of batches, rate of designing clothing and fabric repeat usage have a great effect on the time performance of process. When layout batches reduce about 25%, the total time performance is optimal.

Key words: performance evaluation, process optimization, system dynamics, fast fashion brand, local sensitivity analysis

石春乐陈炜杨以雄 . 快时尚品牌产品开发流程对时间绩效的影响[J]. 纺织学报, 2016, 37(10): 113-119.

参考文献

[1] CHRISTOPHER M., LOWSON R., Peck H. Creating agile supply chains in the fashion industry[J]. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 2004,32(8):367-376. [2] CACHON G. P., SWINNEY R. The value of fast fashion: Quick response, enhanced design, and strategic consumer behavior[J]. Management Science, 2011,57(4):778. [3] STALK G. Time - the next source competitive advantage[J]. Harvard Business Review, 1988:41-51. [4] FORD D. N., STERMAN J. D. Dynamic modeling of product development processes[J]. System Dynamics Review, 1998,14(1):31-68. [5] ATTEMA A. E., BLEICHRODT H., ROHDE K. I. M., et al. Time-tradeoff sequences for analyzing discounting and time inconsistency[J]. Management Science, 2010,56(11):2015. [6] MASON-JONES R., TOWILL D. R. Total cycle time compression and the agile supply chain[J]. International Journal of Production Economics, 1999,62(1-2):61-73. [7] SHANG W., LIU L. Promised delivery time and capacity games in time-based competition[J]. Management Science, 2011,57(3):599-610. [8] HAMMER. Reengineering Work: Don't Automate, Obliterate[J]. Harvard Business Review, 1990,4:104-112. [9] 黄旭, 程林林. 西方资源基础理论评析[J]. 财经科学, 2005(03):94-99. HUANG Xu, CHENG Linlin. Comments on western enterprise resource -based theory[J]. Finance Economics, 2005(03):94-99. [10] MINTZBERG H., LAMPEL J. Reflecting on the strategy process[J]. Sloan Management Journal, 1999. [11] ADDAMS H. L., EMBLEY K. Performance management systems: From strategic planning to employee productivity[J]. Personnel, 1988,65:55-60. [12] TAPINOS E., DYSON R. G., MEADOWS M. The impact of performance measurement in strategic planning[J]. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 2005,54:370-384. [13] MITCHELL V. W. The delphi technique: an exposition and application[J]. 1991,3(4):333-358. [14] BLACK D. On the rationale of group decision-making[J]. Journal of Political Economy, 1948,56(1):23-34. [15] L SAATY T. The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation[M]//New York: McGraw-Hill, 1990:123-139. [16] World Bank. World Development Report[M]//New York: Oxford University Press, 1987:23-36. [17] GUO HONG. Extension of the Norm Interval for Relational Space of Grey System Theory[M]. Beijing: China Ocean Press, 1988. [18] CHAMES A., COOPER W W., RHODES E. Measuring the efficiency of decision making units[J]. European Journal of Operational, 1978,6(2):429-444. [19] 戴西超, 张庆春. 综合评价中权重系数确定方法的比较研究[J]. 煤炭经济研究, 2003(11):37. DAI Xichao, ZHANG Qingchun. The comparative study on comprehensive evaluation methods for conforming weight coefficients[J]. Coal Economic Research, 2003(11):37. [20] 郑培, 黎建强. 基于模糊评估和马尔可夫预测的供应链动态平衡记分卡[J]. 系统工程理论与实践, 2008(04):57-64. ZHENG Pei, LI Jianqiang. Research on supply chain dynamic balanced scorecard based on fuzzy evaluation and Markov forecast techniques[J]. System Engineering Theory and Practice, 2008(04):57-64. [21] 郑培. 动态供应链绩效评价方法研究[D]. 湖南大学, 2008. ZHENG Pei. Research on the dynamic supply chain performance measurement methods[D]. Hunan University, 2008 [22] 斯特曼. 商务动态分析方法——对复杂世界的系统思考与建模[M]. 朱岩, 钟永光等, 译. 北京: 清华大学出版社, 2008. STERMAN J D. Business dynamics——systems thinking and modeling for a complex world[M]. Beijing: Tsinghua University Press, 2008(in Chinese). [23] 盛昭瀚, 张维. 管理科学研究中的计算实验方法[J]. 管理科学学报, 2011(05):1-10. SHENG Zhaohan, ZHANG Wei. Computational experiments in management science and research[J]. Journal of Management Sciences in China, 2011(05):1-10. [24] 蔡毅, 邢岩, 胡丹. 敏感性分析综述[J]. 北京师范大学学报(自然科学版), 2008(01):9-16. CAI Yi, XING Yan, HU Dan. On sensitivity analysis[J]. Journal of Beijing Normal University. 2008(01):9-16. [25] SARGENT R. G. Verification and validation of simulation models[J]. Journal of Simulation, 2013,7(1):12-24. [26] FRANCOS A. Sensitivity analysis of distributed environmental simulation models: understanding the model behavior in hydrological studies at the catchment scale[J]. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 2003,2(79):205-218. [27] SHANNON C. E. A Mathematical Theory of Communication[M]. The University of Illinois Press, 1947.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed