{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01598173515981735, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.896860986547085, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
On the integration of due date setting and order release control

Abstract This paper calls for a paradigm shift in the production control literature away from assuming due date setting and order release are two independent decision levels. When order release is controlled, jobs do not enter the shop floor directly but are retained in a pre-shop pool and released to meet certain performance targets. This makes the setting of accurate planned release dates – the point at which jobs transition from the pool to the shop floor – a key consideration when setting due dates. We develop a new approach to estimating planned release dates to be embedded in the Workload Control (WLC) concept. Our approach is unique as it anticipates the release decision as part of the due date setting procedure. This makes a second independent release decision superfluous and avoids a major cause of tardiness – deviations between (i) the planned release date used when calculating the delivery time allowance and (ii) the actual, realised release date. Simulation is used to compare the performance of WLC using two decision levels with the new single-level approach where the release decision is anticipated when setting the due date. Performance improvements are shown to be robust to uncertainty in processing time estimates.