4.7 Article

Considering skills evolutions in multi-skilled workforce allocation with flexible working hours

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRODUCTION RESEARCH
卷 52, 期 15, 页码 4548-4573

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/00207543.2013.877613

关键词

project scheduling; workforce allocation; multi-skilled; dynamic skills; annualised hours; genetic algorithms

资金

  1. Ministry of Higher Education & Scientific Research, Arab Republic of Egypt/Cultural Affairs & Missions Sector [CAM-75-fm-01/06]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The growing need of responsiveness for manufacturing companies facing market volatility raises a strong demand for flexibility in their organisation. Since the company personnel are increasingly considered as the core of the organisational structures, a strong and forward-looking management of human resources and skills is crucial to performance in many industries. These organisations must develop strategies for the short, medium and long terms, in order to preserve and develop skills. Responding to this importance, this work presents an original model, looking at the line-up of multi-period project, considering the problem of staff allocation with two degrees of flexibility. The first results from the annualising of working time, and relies on policies of changing schedules, individually as well as collectively. The second degree of flexibility is the versatility of the operators, which induces a dynamic view of their skills and the need to predict changes in individual performance as a result of successive assignments. We are firmly in a context where the expected durations of activities are no longer predefined, but result from the performance of the operators selected for their execution. We present a mathematical model of this problem, which is solved by a genetic algorithm. An illustrative example is presented and analysed, and, the robustness of the solving approach is investigated using a sample of 400 projects with different characteristics.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据