CPIM-8.0 APICS Exam Lab Questions

Rough-cut capacity planning (RCCP) is a technique that evaluates the feasibility of a master production schedule (MPS) by comparing the available capacity of key resources with the required capacity of the MPS. In a job shop environment, where products are made to order and have high variety and low volume, RCCP would typically review only the critical work centers to determine the ability to execute the plan. Critical work centers are those that have the greatest impact on the throughput, lead time, or cost of the products. They are usually the work centers that have the highest utilization, longest setup times, or most frequent bottlenecks. By focusing on the critical work centers, RCCP can simplify the capacity planning process and identify the potential problems or constraints that may affect the MPS. The other options, gateway work centers, final assembly work centers, and all work centers, are not as effective as critical work centers for RCCP in a job shop environment, as they may not reflect the true capacity requirements or constraints of the products. References:

Rough Cut Capacity Planning (RCCP) - Definition, Example, and Benefits

Rough Cut Capacity Planning (RCCP) - Meaning, Objectives, and Advantages

Rough Cut Capacity Planning (RCCP) - Overview, Steps, and Example

An effective approach to projecting requirements for materials with long lead times is to initiate a multilevel master schedule. A multilevel master schedule is a detailed plan that shows the quantities and timing of the end items and all of their components at each level of the bill of materials (BOM). By using a multilevel master schedule, a planner can determine the requirements for materials with long lead times and place orders in advance to avoid shortages or delays. A phantom bill of materials (BOM) is a temporary grouping of components that are used in the production of a parent item, but do not exist as a separate item in inventory. A phantom BOM is not an effective approach to projecting requirements for materials with long lead times, as it does not reflect the actual demand for the components. Increasing the level of safety stock is a way of mitigating the risk of uncertainty in demand or supply, but it is not an effective approach to projecting requirements for materials with long lead times, as it increases the inventory carrying costs and does not address the root cause of the problem. Decreasing the planning horizon is the opposite of an effective approach to projecting requirements for materials with long lead times, as it reduces the visibility and accuracy of the forecast and increases the likelihood of stockouts or excess inventory. References:

CPIM Part 2 Learning System, Module 1: Supply Chain Strategy, Section 1.4: Master Scheduling

CPIM Part 2 Learning System, Module 3: Supply, Section 3.2: Material Requirements Planning

If demand is relatively stable and has only minor random variation, a stable or slow-responding forecasting method, such as a moving average with a long period, is best. Fast-responding methods are prone to overreact to noise in such cases.

“Slow-responding methods are preferred when random variation is small and stability is desired in forecasted outputs.”

— CPIM ECO Module; Forecasting Techniques Section