MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W224927237

Scenario Analysis for S&OP

2012· article· en· W224927237 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œjournal of business forecasting · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMarine and Offshore Engineering Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScenario analysisScenario planningLeverage (statistics)Risk analysis (engineering)Process managementContext (archaeology)Outcome (game theory)Volatility (finance)Computer scienceOperations researchBusinessMarketingEconomicsEngineeringFinanceMicroeconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | This article shows how scenario analysis can be effectively used in the framework of S&OP to manage issues that are very complex and involved. The basic steps are, first, to know where you are and where you want to be, next, what options are open and their expected outcome, and then choosing the one that is likely to optimize the outcome.Today's business environment is becoming ever more volatile and complex. Market dynamics are changing rapidly and lead times required to respond are weeks or days, not years and months. The more your business experiences supply side volatility, demand uncertainty, or both, the more you need to understand their impact and the ability to respond. For that, scenario analysis is a must.Our experience has shown that scenario analysis is a useful tool for Senior Management if it is simple to understand and the analysis is actionable. It helps to understand the potential impact of a change in business, as well as the best way to mitigate / leverage it. To get the most from scenario analysis, we should concentrate on gaining insights within the context of operational constraints and realities, not on evaluating operational details. An effective scenario analysis:* Considers simultaneously a range of strategic, tactical, and operational goals and constraints* Views business holistically rather than by function* Takes into account the domino and cumulative effect of mu Iti pie events* Keeps everything transparentTo be most effective it must do all the above quickly and efficiently. We recommend that the scenario analysis models should run in 10 minutes or less after an update.What drives scenario analysis? The business needs or questions to be answered. A critical first step in building a successful scenario analysis system is to understand what issues are creating the greatest difficulty for executives and/or what opportunities have the potential to strengthen the company. Then you will know what data have to be collected and how the model has to be configured to meet the needs of Senior Management.AN EXAMPLE: SAILBOAT SUPPLYLet us take an example of Sailboat Supply (SBS), which is a manufacturer and wholesaler of aftermarket spare parts for sailboats. The model for SBS has the following characteristics:Product Families: SBS has four product families: Blocks, cam cleats, mounts, and swivels. Each family has very different resource requirements, profit margins, and sales volume. A new product family, winches, is in the development phase. Winches are more complex and quite material intensive, but are expected to yield excellent margins. Their preliminary forecast for market demand is fairly strong.Markets: SBS has five established markets: US East, US West, US South, Canada East, and Canada West. Emerging Markets are in the United Kingdom and Spain. These markets have different growth profiles and margins.Manufacturing: Manufacturing is relatively simple. When bottlenecks occur, they are mostly in molding and packaging. Labor is available in regular shifts, overtime, and by contract.Raw materials: Manufacturing considers nine components to be critical since they have very long lead times and/or highly variable costs. Some materials are common across all products, although in different proportions, and some are unique only to one or two products.Suppliers: SBS has 13 suppliers for the nine critical components. Three materials have multiple suppliers with differing costs, and lead times as well as minimum quantity requirements. Six materials have unique suppliers.Figure 1 gives 24-month revenue forecasts of all the four product families. It shows that SBS is not having a good year. Revenue of all four families is down from last year.INTEGRATED PICTURE OFTHE BUSINESSFigure 2 gives an overall snapshot of SBS. The charts show the sales forecast by units and by revenue, as well as some operational and financial numbers based upon the sales forecast. …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.685
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.186 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it