Flexibility Principles

  • Stephen C. Graves
Part of the International Series in Operations Research & Management Science book series (ISOR, volume 115)

Consider a setting with multiple demand classes that are served by a set of resources. When each resource is limited to serving only one demand class, we can often have a situation where some resources are under-utilized and idle, while others are over-utilized and not able to meet the demand. One tactic for dealing with this situation is to make each resource more flexible so that it can serve more than one demand class. But how much flexibility should each resource have and what is the best way to deploy flexibility across the resources? This chapter shows that when done right, limited flexibility can provide almost the same level of benefits as complete flexibility.


Call Center Demand Scenario Time Buffer Closed Chain Limited Flexibility 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This research has been supported in part by the MIT Leaders for Manufacturing Program, a partnership between MIT and major manufacturing firms; and by the Singapore-MIT Alliance, an engineering education and research collaboration among the National University of Singapore, Nanyang Technological University, and MIT.

Selected Bibliography

  1. Graves, S. C. and B. T. Tomlin (2003), “Process Flexibility in Supply Chains,” Management Science, 49 (7), 907–919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Gurumurthi, S. and S. Benjaafar (2004), “Modeling and Analysis of Flexible Queueing Systems,” Naval Research Logistics, 51 (5), 755–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Hopp, W. J., E. Tekin, and M. P. Van Oyen (2004) “Benefits of Skill Chaining in Serial Production Lines with Cross-Trained Workers,” Management Science, 50 (1), 83–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Inman, R. R., W. C. Jordan and D. E. Blumenfeld (2004) “Chained Cross-Training of Assembly Line Workers,” International Journal of Production Research, 42 (10), 1899–1910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Iravani, S. M., M. P. Van Oyen and K. T. Sims (2005) “Structural Flexibility: A New Perspective on the Design of Manufacturing and Service Operations,” Management Science, 51 (2), 151–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Jordan, W. C. and S. C. Graves (1995), “Principles on the Benefits of Manufacturing Process Flexibility,” Management Science, 41 (4), 577–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Jordan, W. C., R. R. Inman, and D. E. Blumenfeld (2004), “Chained Cross-Training of Workers for Robust Performance,” IIE Transactions, 36 (10), 953–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Wallace, R. B. and W. Whitt (2005) “A Staffing Algorithm for Call Centers with Skill-Based Routing,” Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 7 (4), 276–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© by Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephen C. Graves

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations