ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF AGGREGATE

PLANNING OF FUN DOH AT PT ACOSTA

SUPER FOOD

Desty Natalia and Bachtiar H. Simamora

BINUS University, Jl. K.H. Syahdan No.9, Kemanggisan/Palmerah, Jakarta Barat, 021-5345830
Email: natalia.desty@rocketmail.com ; bachtiar_04@yahoo.com
ABSTRACT

The rapid growth of educational toy industry has lead to a fierce competition. PT Acosta Super Food
which is one of the player in educational toy industry, is currently trying to win the industry. The
company needs competitive advantage to develop a good strategy in winning the competition. The
objectives of this study are to calculate the seasonal forecasted demand in 2014 in PT Acosta Super
Food and to find the best solution for PT Acosta Super Food to meet seasonal demand with the lowest
cost. The method for this thesis is quantitative method with an applied research to solve the problem
in the company. The data is gathered through literature review and secondary data directly from the
company. The demand data from past three years is used to forecast the seasonal demand using
multiplicative seasonal model. All of data is analyzed and used to design aggregate planning by using
three strategy, which are chase, level and mixed strategy. The calculation of the cost of each strategy
is using manual computation and application POM for Windows. The results of this study shows that
the mixed strategy is the optimal strategy to meet demand with the lowest cost for PT Acosta Super
Food.

Keywords: aggregate planning, seasonal demand, forecast demand, educational toy industry

ABSTRAK

Pesatnya pertumbuhan industri mainan edukasi menyebabkan persaingan yang ketat. PT Acosta
Super Food yang merupakan salah satu pemain dalam industri mainan edukasi sedang berusaha
memenangkan industri ini. Perusahaan membutuhkan keunggulan kompetitif untuk mengembangkan
strategi yang baik untuk memenangkan persaingan. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk menghitung
perkiraan permintaan musiman di tahun 2014 dan menemukan solusi terbaik untuk PT Acosta Super
Food untuk memenuhi permintaan musiman dengan biaya terendah. Metode dalam penelitian ini
adalah metode kuantitatif dengan penelitian terapan untuk memecahkan masalah di perusahaan.
Data dikumpulkan melalui kajian literatur dan data sekunder yang didapatkan dari perusahaan. Data
permintaan dari 3 tahun terakhir digunakan untuk memperkirakan permintaan musiman dengan
menggunakan multiplicative seasonal model. Semua data dianalisis dan digunakan untuk merancang
perencanaan agregat dengan menggunakan tiga strategi, yaitu chase, level dan mixed strategy.
Perhitungan biaya setia strategi menggunakan perhitungan manual dan aplikasi POM for Windows.
Hasil dari penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa mixed strategy adalah strategi yang optimal untuk
memenuhi permintaan dengan biaya terendah untuk PT Acosta Super Food.

Kata kunci: perencanaan agregat, permintaan musiman, perkiraan permintaan, industri mainan
edukasi.

INTRODUCTION
Nowadays, parents prefer educational toys than common toys. Educational toys are toys that
have educational value and are used for educational purposes. Educational toys are not only exciting
but also stimulate children to learn. Educational toys have many benefit. Some of them are developing
children’s imagination and creativity, developing children’s ability to concentrate, developing
children’s motoric skills and coordination among member of body (www.melindahospital.com).
Because of that, the educational toy industry is growing rapidly. It is proved by the increased number
 of the sales of educational toys in 2012. Sales of educational toy during the first semester in 2012 is
expected to reach Rp 60 billion. It was increased about 10 – 15 % from last year (www.okezone.com).
The increasing number of children within school age in Indonesia could also make educational
toys industry have a better progress (www.tubasmedia.com). The growth of children within school
age in Indonesia increases every year. This leads to the increased demand of educational toys,
especially when new school year is coming (www.neraca.co.id). The growth of educational toys
industry increases the competition among the firms. In 2012, there are 84 toy companies that
registered in the APMETI (Asosiasi Penggiat Mainan Edukatif dan Tradisional Indonesia) and the
number keeps growing bigger. Not only big companies, many small firms also start to join the
business. Not to mention foreign competitors like China that sell toys with very cheap price.
It is important that a company to be able to manage all of the resources to meet customer
demand in order to survive in this competition. Company’s response time on orders of customers is
becoming critical issue to achieve competitive advantage (Aaradi and Radwan,2011). Lisboa, Gamis
and Yasin (2012) quoted from a subsequent research by Cámison and Lopez (2010), in such
operational environments, achieving and sustaining a competitive advantage is no easy task. In this
context, the competitiveness of the organization is very much contingent on its ability to operate as a
dynamic, open operational system. The open operational system must be able to read the competitive
environment in order to determine the demand, which reflects the customers’ timely requirements.
Once the demand is determined, the organization must devise operational plans to meet the demand.
When one company cannot meet customer demand, other companies will directly try to
dominate the market. However, it is difficult for a company to always be able to meet customer
demand because demand is fluctuative. Demand is not a constant variable. In some situation or time, a
demand can be very high, in some other time the demand can decrease. According to Heizer and
Render (2011), manufacturers such as Frito-Lay also face tough decisions when trying to schedule
products, such as snack food which the demand is heavily dependent on seasonal variation. This is the
problem in operations that every company faces.
PT Acosta Super Food, is one of companies that is engaged in educational toys industry. PT
Acosta Super Food is founded by Junirman Jaqin (now become the director) on April 1st 2007. After 6
years, now PT Acosta Super Food has several product brands, such as Fun-Doh Modelling
Compound, Cherrydoh, Fun Glass, Cotton, Fosile, Air Ball, Box Science, IQ Puzzle, Build, Mag
Smile, Mini Pets, Fun-Bike, and Yabuble. The most popular product is Fun-Doh Modelling
Compound, which is wax similar toys that can be formed and modified as desired. The strength of the
products is designed to be safe and non-toxic for children. PT Acosta Super Food sells its products
through some channels, such as distributors, wholesalers and retailers. Now PT Acosta Super Food is
also facing the problem of fulfilling demand. PT Acosta Super Food is facing difficulty in fulfilling
uncertain demand of the biggest product, which is Fun Doh Modelling Compound (henceforward will
be referred as Fun Doh). The variation of demand pattern makes the company difficult to set further
strategy. The variation of demand also causes the huge different cost every period. PT Acosta Super
Food has never forecast demand for the future. Meanwhile, Hanke and Winchern (2005) stated that
forecasting is necessary to all organizations that operate in an atmosphere of uncertainty to help make
better decisions and plans that affect the future of the organization.
Up to this time PT Acosta Super Food manufactures the products according to customers’
demand. When the demand request comes in, PT Acosta will manufacture its products (make to
order). However, when the demand is very high, PT Acosta Super Food’s factory is unable to produce
their products to meet the demand on time. While waiting for production, some finished products are
piling up in the warehouse. The factory cannot deliver the finished products yet because it is not
suitable with the customers’ order. It results the stockpiling of products and this makes the customers
wait for a certain period of time. When capacity is inadequate, the resulting shortage can lead to loss
of customers and market share (Heizer and Render,2011).
Many complaints are already received by the company. For the example one of the customer, PT
Ramayana Lestari Sentosa Tbk often complain to PT Acosta Super Food due to the lateness of Fun
Doh product arrival. If this problem continue, customers will continue unsatisfied with PT Acosta
Super Food. Hence customers will lose trust PT Acosta Super Food anymore. When customers lose
their trust, they will not be loyal to the company. The customers will go to the companies that possibly
are the competitors of PT Acosta Super Food. The worst case scenario is the company will gain bad
image and the new potential customers will not come to PT Acosta Super Food. So far the company
has not done any anticipative action to counter this problem. The company has not done anything yet
to solve this problem. Before the fatal outcomes occur, it is important for the company to find solution
to this problem which is meeting the customers demand during peak season while considering the cost
efficiency and profit.
Based on the problems in the background, the problems identification to be investigated are:
1. How much is seasonal forecasted demand of Fun Doh at PT Acosta Super Food in 2014?
2. What is the best solution for PT Acosta Super Food to meet seasonal demand with the lowest
cost?

The objectives that the researcher aims of this research are:

1. To show the seasonal forecasted demand of Fun Doh Modelling Compound at PT Acosta
Super Food in 2014.
2. To find the best solution for PT Acosta Super Food to meet seasonal demand with the lowest
cost.

LITERATURE REVIEW
Operations Management is one of the three major functions of any organization, and it is
integrally related to all the other business functions. All organizations market (sell), finance (account),
and produce (operate), and it is important to know how the operations management activity functions
(Heizer and Render, 2011:36). That’s why operations management is important to be studied.
Schroeder (2008:4) stated that operations is responsible for supplying the products or service of
the organization. Operations managers provide value for the customer at the lowest cost by making
decisions regarding the operations function and its connection with other functions and by managing
the transformation process.
To achieve competitive advantage, operations managers must have good plan for production.
Competitiveness is how effectively an organization meets the want and needs of customers relative to
others that offer similar goods and services (Stevenson, 2009:40). It’s hard for organization to meet
demand because demand keeps changing. So, organization can do demand forecasting for next
production.
According to Heizer and Render (2011:544), demand forecasting can address short-range,
medium-range, and long-range problems. Long-range forecast help managers deal with capacity and
strategic issues and are the responsibility of top management. Top management formulates policy-
related questions, such as facility location and expansion, new product development, research funding,
and investment over a period of several years. Medium-range planning begins once long-term capacity
decisions are made. This is the job of operations managers. Scheduling decisions address the problem
of matching productivity to fluctuating demands. Medium (or intermediate) range planning is
accomplished by building an aggregate production planning. Short-range planning may extend up to a
year but is usually less than 3 moths. This plan is also the responsibility of operations person nel, who
work with supervisors’ foremen to “disaggregate” the intermediate plan into weekly, daily, and hourly
schedules. Tactics for dealing with short-term planning involve loading, sequencing, expediting, and
dispatching.

1. Forecasting
Forecasting is necessary because all organizations operate in an atmosphere of uncertainty but
decision must be made today that affect the future of organization (Hanke and Wichern:1).
Forecasting is an estimation of future level from the past data that is used to make decision within
company in uncertainty condition.
There are some approaches forecasting. According to Heizer and Render (2011:139), there are
two general approaches for forecasting, such as qualitative approach and quantitative approach. In this
thesis, the author is not using qualitative methods. There are two categories in quantitative which are:
1. Time Series Model predict on the assumption that the future is a function of the past. These
models use past data to forecast the future data.
2. Associative Models, incorporate the variables or factors that might influence the quantity
being forecast.
One of time series model is least square regression or linear trend line. According to Russell and
Taylor (2011:512), a linear trend line is a linear regression model relating demand to time. The linear
equation is

where
a = y-axis intercept
b = slope of the line
x = the time period
y = forecast for demand for period x
 There parameters of the linear trend line can be calculated using the least squares formulas for
linear regression:

where
n = number of periods
= the mean of the x values

= the mean of the y values

According to Heizer and Render (2011:153) understanding seasonal variations is important for
capacity planning in organizations that handle peak loads. Seasonality is expressed in terms of the
amount that actual values differ from average values in the time series. Analyzing data in monthly or
quarterly terms usually makes it easy for a statistician to spot seasonal patterns, seasonal indices can
be developed by using a multiplicative seasonal model.
Krajweski, Ritzman, and Malhotra (2007, p521) also suggested to use multiplicative seasonal
method to forecast seasonal demand for all of the seasons. Multiplicative Seasonal Method is a
method where seasonal factors are multiplied by an estimate of average demand to arrive at a seasonal
forecast. Seasonal factor or seasonal index is used to make seasonal adjustment to average demand. It
shows the up and down movements in the forecast. Here are the steps of multiplicative seasonal
method (Heizer and Render, 2011:153-155):
1. Find the average historical demand each month by summing the demand for that month in
each year and dividing by the number of years of data available.
2. Compute the average demand over all months by dividing the total average annual demand
by the number of seasons.
3. Compute a seasonal index for each season by dividing that month’s actual historical demand
(from step 1) by the average demand over all months (from step 2).
4. Estimate next year’s total annual demand.
5. Divide this estimate of total annual demand by the number of months, then multiply it by the
seasonal index for that month. This provides the seasonal forecast.

2. Aggregate Planning
Lisboa, Gomes, and Yasin (2012) stated that as an open operational system, the organization
must adopt operational practices which are consistent with the open system orientation. The open
system organization must be able to read the competitive environment in order to determine the
demand, which reflects the customers’ timely requirements. Once the demand is determined, the
organization must arrange operational plans to meet the demand. Aggregate Production Planning
(APP) is the process, which generates and evaluates these plans.
Based on the journal by Liu, Chua, and Yeoh (2011), aggregate production planning (APP) has
received much interest from both the industrial and academic fields, and aims to identify production,
inventory and work force levels to meet fluctuating demand requirements over an intermediate-range
planning horizon (Chase and Aquilano 1992). Various approaches have been developed to formulate
and resolve the corresponding problems within the manufacturing context (Nam and Logendran
1992). In manufacturing industries, aggregate production planning (APP) is used to best utilize human
and equipment resources to meet fluctuating customer demand.
Meanwhile, according to Heizer and Render (2011:544) aggregate planning is concerned with
determining the quantity and timing of production for intermediate future, often from 3 to 18 months
ahead. Operations manager try to determine the best way to meet forecast demand by adjusting
production rates, labor levels, inventory levels, overtime work, subcontracting rates, and other
controllable variables.
So it can be concluded that aggregate planning is the approach to determine the quantity and
time of production to meet demand for medium or intermediate time range (3-12 months) in the
future. Aggregate planning means combine resources to set a best plan for intermediate-range. In
business, best plan means plan that can meet customer demand in lowest cost. So, in aggregate
planning, operations manager calculate the cost of all possible alternative and choose the lowest one.
According to Schroeder (2008, p270) most aggregate planning methods determine a plan that
minimizes cost. These methods assume that demand is fixed; therefore strategies for modifying
demand are less considered. When demand is considered given, the following cost should be included:
1. Hiring and layoff costs. The hiring cost consists of the recruiting, screening and training cost
required to bring new employee up to full productive skill. The layoff cost includes employee
benefits, severance pay and other costs associated with layoff.
2. Overtime and under time costs. The overtime costs often consist of regular wages plus a 50 to 100
percent premium. The cost of under time is often reflected by the use of employees at less than full
productivity.
3. Inventory-carrying cost. Inventory-carrying costs are associated with maintaining the product in
inventory; they include the cost of capital, variable cost of storage, obsolescence, and
deterioration.
4. Subcontracting costs. The cost of subcontracting is the price that is paid to a subcontractor to
produce the units. Subcontracting costs can be either more or less than the cost of producing units
in-house.
5. Part-time labor costs. Because of differences in benefits and hourly rates, the cost of part-time or
temporary labor will probably be less than that of regular labor.
6. Cost of stock out or back order. The cost of taking a back order or the cost of a stock out should
reflect the effect of reduced customer service. This cost is extremely difficult to estimate, but it can
be related to the loss of customer goodwill and the possible loss of future sales.

3. Planning Strategy
There are some strategies in aggregate planning to solve operations’ problems. According to Jay
Heizer and Barry Render (2011, p 548-549) there are two strategies, which are chase strategy and
level strategy. When just one of these variables is used to absorb demand fluctuations, it is termed a
pure strategy; two or more strategy used in combination called a mixed strategy (Chase and Jacobs,
2011:570).
Chase strategy is a strategy to achieve output rates of each period that match the demand forecast
for that period. According to Aarabi and Radwan (2011), chase strategy that is also called “Just-In-
Time”, tries to adjust production to meet demand. A chase strategy adjust the labour inputs in order to
track the expected monthly demands. Common tactics for varying capacity are overtime or undertime,
hiring or firing and subcontracting some work out (Buxey, 2005). According to Heizer and Render
(2011, p 548-549), this strategy can be accomplished by changing workforce level, varying work
hours, or subcontracting. The main purpose of this strategy is to meet demand in each period with any
possible ways. The inventory cost in this strategy is low. However, it results in high training cost,
overhead cost and high hiring and firing cost.
A level strategy is an aggregate plan in which the company produce the same amount of product
from period to period. According to Buxey (2005), a level strategy maintains a contant daily
(aggregate) production rate, and draws upon stockpiles of finished good whenever monthly outputs
dip below their matching sales marks. In addition, Heizer and Render (2011) said that, a level strategy
prefer to produce same level of output that can be saved to cover the shortfall in other periods, which
means using constant workforce in constant work hours. It results in high inventory cost but the cost
of employee is constant. Aarabi and Radwan (2011) stated that this strategy that also called “Just-In-
Case”, basically moderates the fluctuations, holding inventory or placing backorders as needed levels.
Mixed strategy is the combination of two or more alternatives. Normally, a certain combination
of level and chase strategy (a mixed strategy) minimizes the total marginal (labor-inventory) cost
summed over a 12 months horizon (Geoff Buxey, 2005). Russell and Taylor said that mixed strategy
can incorporate management policies, like no more than 5% can be laid off.
Heizer and Render (2011: p549-554) stated that there are several techniques that operations
managers use to develop aggregate plans:
1. Graphical Methods.
Aggregate planning techniques that work with a few variables at a time to allow planners to
compare forecasted demand with existing capacity. They are trial and error approaches that do
not guarantee an optimal production plan. Operations manager can use graphical methods to
calculate either chase or level strategy. Following are the five steps in the graphical method:
a. Determine the demand in each period.
b. Determine capacity for regular time, overtime, and subcontracting each period.
c. Find labor cost, hiring and layoff costs, and inventory holding cost.
d. Consider company policy that may apply to the workers or to stock levels.
e. Develop alternative plans and examine their total costs.
2. Mathematical Approaches.
One of mathematical approaches is the transportation method of linear programming; a way of
solving for the optimal solution to an aggregate planning problem. The transportation method
 of linear programming is not a trial and error approach like graphing but rather produces an
optimal plan for minimizing cost. It is also flexible in that it can specify regular and overtime
production in each time period, the number of units to be subcontracted, extra shifts, and the
inventory carryover from period to period. Based on the literature of Russel and Taylor
(2011:623), the transportation method is used when hiring and firing is not an option. The
transportation method gathers all the cost information into one matrix and plans production
based on the lowest cost alternatives. Sukendar and Kristomi (2008) also suggested to use the
transportation method for aggregate planning due to efficiency. This model is calculated with
transportation table. This method uses rows that represent capacity alternatives and colomns
that represent demand. In each cell, there is the cost of each capacity alternatives.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This research is applied research conducted at PT Acosta Super Food in operation area. Applied
research is a research used to solve a current problem faced by the company in the work setting,
demanding a timely solution (Uma Sekaran, 2003). This research is conducted to help the company
forecast the seasonal demand in 2014 and meet the demand with the lowest cost strategy. This
research used secondary data from the company and data from literature review. The researcher uses
multiplicative seasonal model to forecast the seasonal demand. In determining the aggregate planning
strategy, the researcher uses three planning strategies, such as chase, level and mixed strategy to
evaluate which is the optimal strategy. The planning strategies is calculated using manual calculation
and POM for Windows application.

RESEARCH ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

Based on the data collected, the researcher calculated the seasonal forecasted demand. This is the
result of seasonal forecasted demand using multiplicative seasonal method:

Table 1 Seasonal Forecasted Demand

Average Seasonal
Demand of Forecasted
Month Seasonal Index 2014 Demand
January 0,947235 41532 39.341
February 1,286029 41532 53.411
March 0,827944 41532 34.386
April 0,582196 41532 24.180
May 1,156805 41532 48.044
June 1,349606 41532 56.052
July 0,979234 41532 40.670
August 0,739607 41532 30.717
September 0,885271 41532 36.767
October 1,023292 41532 42.500
November 0,963436 41532 40.013
December 1,259345 41532 52.303
Source: Result of Data Processing

After obtaining the seasonal forecasted demand for 2014, which is then followed by the
computation of each strategy’s cost. There are three strategies: chase, level and mixed strategy.
1. Chase Strategy
Chase strategy is strategy to produce the amount of products of each month that match the demand
forecast for that month. In this strategy, there is no inventory cost. The company must produce the
exact amount of product that match demand through regular production, overtime production and also subcontracting. The result can be seen in Table 2 below.

Table 2 Cost of Chase Strategy

Capacity Production Cost
Forecasted Overtime Subcontract
Month Demand Regular Overtime Subcontract Regular Overtime Subcontract Regular (@846) (@1152) (@1250)
January 39341 41000 8200 5000 39.341 0 0 Rp33.282.486,00 Rp0,00 Rp0,00
February 53411 41000 8200 5000 41.000 8.200 4.211 Rp34.686.000,00 Rp9.446.400,00 Rp5.263.750,00
March 34386 41000 8200 5000 34.386 0 0 Rp29.090.556,00 Rp0,00 Rp0,00
April 24180 43050 8200 5000 24.180 0 0 Rp20.456.280,00 Rp0,00 Rp0,00
May 48044 36900 8200 5000 36.900 8.200 2.944 Rp31.217.400,00 Rp9.446.400,00 Rp3.680.000,00
June 56052 43050 8200 5000 43.050 8.200 4.802 Rp36.420.300,00 Rp9.446.400,00 Rp6.002.500,00
July 40670 43050 8200 5000 40.670 0 0 Rp34.406.820,00 Rp0,00 Rp0,00
August 30717 43050 8200 5000 30.717 0 0 Rp25.986.582,00 Rp0,00 Rp0,00
September 36767 45100 8200 5000 36.767 0 0 Rp31.104.882,00 Rp0,00 Rp0,00
October 42500 47150 8200 5000 42.500 0 0 Rp35.955.000,00 Rp0,00 Rp0,00
November 40013 41000 8200 5000 40.013 0 0 Rp33.850.998,00 Rp0,00 Rp0,00
December 52303 45100 8200 5000 45.100 7.203 0 Rp38.154.600,00 Rp8.297.856,00 Rp0,00
Total 498.384 454.624 31.803 11.957 Rp384.611.904,00 Rp36.637.056,00 Rp14.946.250,00
Total Cost Rp436.195.210,00
Source: Result of Data Processing, 2014

It can be seen how many total units that must be produced with regular time, overtime and subcontracting to apply the chase s trategy. The chase strategy force the workers to
produce the exact amount of the demand. Therefore, there is no inventory. The total cost of PT Acosta Super Food’s chase strategy is Rp 436.195.210,00.

2. Level Strategy
The second strategy is to produce the same amount of products each month in one year. The total demand in 2014 is 498.384 uni ts, so every month PT Acosta Super
Food must produce 41.532 units. There will be high inventory cost and shortage cost. When the co mpany produce more than the demand, there will be many inventories.
When the company produce less than the demand, there will be shortage cost because customer cannot get the products. The resu lt can be seen below.
 Table 3 Cost of Level Strategy
Capacity Quantity Produce COST
Forecasted Production/
Month Sub - Inventory Shortage Overtime Inventory
Demand month Regular Overtime Regular Overtime Regular (@846) Shortage (@750)
contract (@1152) (@37)
January 39.341 41.532 41.000 8.200 5.000 41.000 532 2.191 0 Rp34.686.000,00 Rp612.864,00 Rp81.067,00 Rp0,00
February 53.411 41.532 41.000 8.200 5.000 41.000 532 0 9.688 Rp34.686.000,00 Rp612.864,00 Rp0,00 Rp7.266.000,00
March 34.386 41.532 41.000 8.200 5.000 41.000 532 0 2.542 Rp34.686.000,00 Rp612.864,00 Rp0,00 Rp1.906.500,00
April 24.180 41.532 43.050 8.200 5.000 41.532 0 14.810 0 Rp35.136.072,00 Rp0,00 Rp547.970,00 Rp0,00
May 48.044 41.532 36.900 8.200 5.000 36.900 4.632 8.298 0 Rp31.217.400,00 Rp5.336.064,00 Rp307.026,00 Rp0,00
June 56.052 41.532 43.050 8.200 5.000 41.532 0 0 6.222 Rp35.136.072,00 Rp0,00 Rp0,00 Rp4.666.500,00
July 40.670 41.532 43.050 8.200 5.000 41.532 0 0 5.360 Rp35.136.072,00 Rp0,00 Rp0,00 Rp4.020.000,00
August 30.717 41.532 43.050 8.200 5.000 41.532 0 5.455 0 Rp35.136.072,00 Rp0,00 Rp201.835,00 Rp0,00
September 36.767 41.532 45.100 8.200 5.000 41.532 0 10.220 0 Rp35.136.072,00 Rp0,00 Rp378.140,00 Rp0,00
October 42.500 41.532 47.150 8.200 5.000 41.532 0 9.252 0 Rp35.136.072,00 Rp0,00 Rp342.324,00 Rp0,00
November 40.013 41.532 41.000 8.200 5.000 41.000 532 10.771 0 Rp34.686.000,00 Rp612.864,00 Rp398.527,00 Rp0,00
December 52.303 41.532 45.100 8.200 5.000 41.532 0 0 0 Rp35.136.072,00 Rp0,00 Rp0,00 Rp0,00
Total 498.384 498.384 491.624 6.760 60.997 23.812 Rp415.913.904,00 Rp7.787.520,00 Rp2.256.889,00 Rp17.859.000,00
Total Cost Rp443.817.313,00
Source: Result of Data Processing, 2014

The company must produce 491.624 units in regular time and 6760 units in overtime. There are no subcontract. The total cost o f level strategy is Rp 443.817.313,00. The
cost of level strategy is higher than chase strategy because there is high shortage cost in level strategy.

3. Mixed Strategy
The mixed strategy is mixing chase and level strategy, taking into account the advantages and disadvantages of chase and leve l strategy, with the aim to reduce the negative
effects of alternative pure strategy previously offered. The point is to produce suit to production capacity of regular time, overtime and subcontract, and still fulfill the demand
every month. This strategy is searching the way to not back ordering because back order can cause lost sales and more disappointment come from the customer. In this study
the researcher uses the transportation method to search for optimal solution. These figures below are the result from POM for Windows application for transportation method
calculation. Figure 1 shows how much units produced in each month to fulfill the demand.
 Figure 1 Unit Produce using Transportation
Source: Result of POM for Windows, 2014

The following figure (Figure 2) is the cost of each production each month.

Figure 2 Cost of Production using Transportation Method

Source: Result of POM for Windows.

The cost is calculated from multiplying the units produced (Figure 1) with the cost of production
(Figure 2) that is in the same cell. For example: to calculate the cost of production in January in
regular time for January demand is 36.789 times 846. The product that is produced in particular month
but is not sold directly in that month, will be save in the warehouse to fulfill the demand in the next
month. It will be charged the production cost and inventory cost. For example: production in January
regular time can be used to fulfill demand in February, the cost is Rp 846,00 + Rp 37,00 = Rp 883,00.
The following is the calculation of the total cost each month.

Table 4 Total Cost Calculation using Transportation

Production
Month Units Produced x Cost Total Cost Demand
January 36789 units x 846 31.123.494 39341 in January

2552 units x 1152 2.939.904

4211 units x 883 3.718.313 53411 in February
February 41000 units x 846 34.686.000
8200 units x 1152 9.446.400
March 34386 units x 846 29.090.556 34386 in March

5276 units x 883 4.658.708 24180 in April

April 18904 units x 846 15.992.784
24146 units x 883 21.320.918 48.044 in May
May 23898 units x 846 20.217.708
13002 units x 883 11.480.766 56.052 in June
June 43050 units x 846 36.420.300
July 40670 units x 846 34.406.820 40.670 in July
August 30717 units x 846 25.986.582 30.717 in August
September 36767 units x 846 31.104.882 36.767 in September

1566 units x 883 1.382.778 42.500 in October

October 40934 units x 846 34.630.164
6216 units x 883 5.488.728 40.013 in November
November 33797 units x 846 28.592.262
7203 units x 883 6.360.249 52.303 in December
December 45100 units x 846 38.154.600
Total Cost 427.202.916
Source: Result of Data Processing, 2014

The total cost of the mixed strategy from POM for Windows is Rp 427.202.900,00. There is
slightly differences between the manual calculation and the computation using application because the
application automatically round the result; Rp 427.202.916,00 is rounded to Rp 427.202.900,00. There
is no unfulfilled demand so the customer will be satisfy with the company.

4. Implication of Research

Regular Overtime Sub- Time in meeting

Strategy Shortage Inventory Total Cost
Production Production contract demand
Chase
□ □ □ On time
Strategy Rp436.195.210,00
Level Not always on
□ □ □ □
Strategy time Rp443.817.313,00
Mixed
□ □ □ On time
Strategy Rp427.202.916,00
Source: Result of Data Processing, 2014

By comparing all three strategies, it can tell that:

  Chase strategy uses regular, overtime and subcontract production to be able to meet the
demand on time. Chase strategy force to produce the exact amount of demand in order
to not have inventory level.
 Level strategy uses regular and overtime production only, but results in some shortage
and high inventory level. The biggest disadvantage of level strategy is cannot always
meet the demand on time (but still can meet those demand but late).
 Mixed strategy is combining those two strategies. Mixed strategy uses regular and
overtime production because the cost of subcontract is very high. Mixed strategy
doesn’t force the company to produce all the demand in that month, but distribute the
production to the month before, results in some inventory level. However, the most
important thing is mixed strategy can meet the demand on time with the lowest cost.
It can be concluded that from all three strategies, mixed strategy calculated using transportation
method is the most optimal strategy of aggregate planning for PT Acosta Super Food problem.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the analysis that has been discussed above, it can be concluded as follows:
1. Fun Doh’s seasonal demand in 2014 is forecasted using multiplicative seasonal method by
determining the seasonal index each month from the past three years data. The highest demand
of the year is in June where the holiday starts. The lowest demand of the year is in April.
2. There are three strategies that are being considered in this study. They are Chase Strategy, Level
Strategy and Mixed Strategy options. The mixed strategy is the best option for the company with
the lowest cost of Rp 427.202.916,00.
From the result of this study that have been described above, the researcher is up on some suggestions
as below:
1. The researcher suggests that PT Acosta Super Food should always forecast the demand
rigorously because educational toy is a very seasonal demand product. A good forecasted
demand will enable the company easier to set the strategy of production planning.
2. For 2014, the best solution is the mixed strategy calculated with the transportation method of
linear programming. The company should consider to change the policy. Up to this time, the
workers of PT Acosta Super Food is rarely work overtime. PT Acosta Super Food should start to
impose overtime working officially.
3. For the following years, the mixed strategy is not neccesarily the best solution for PT Acosta
Super Food. For next years, PT Acosta must consider the company’s policy, company’s
resources and all costs such as regular time production cost, overtime cost, subcontract cost,
shortage cost, holding cost and any other cost. The company must recalculate the costs and
evaluate other considerations. If the condition remains the same, PT Acosta Super Food is
advised to continuously use mixed strategy for aggregate planning. If there is any changes, the
researcher suggests that PT Acosta Super Food should consider and calculate those three
alternatives (chase, level and mixed strategy). The company should choose the most optimal
alternative in meeting seasonal demand with the lowest cost.
4. This study is limited to one product which is the major or biggest product at PT Acosta Super
Food. For future study, the researcher suggests to do aggregate planning for all products in the
company if needed.

REFERENCES
Bozarth, Cecil C., & Handfield, Robert B. (2012). Introduction to Operations and Supply Chain
Management. 3rd Edition. Pearson.
Buxey, G. (2005). Aggregate Planning for Seasonal Demand: Reconciling Theory with
Practice. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 25(11), 1083-
1100.
Chase, R.B., & Jacobs, F.R. (2011). Operations and Supplu Chain Management. 13th Edition.
McGraw Hill.
Daft, Richard L., & Marcic, Dorothy. (2007). Management: The New Workplace. Canada: South-
Western.
Dyck, Bruno., & Neubert, Mitchell J. (2011). Principles of Management. USA:South-Western.
Evans, James R., & Collier, David A. (2007). Operations Management: An Integrated Goods and
Services Approach. South Western.
Hanke, John E., & Wichern, Dean W. (2005). Business Forecasting. 8th edition. New Jersey:Pearson
Education.
Krajewski, Lee J., Ritzman, Larry P., & Malhotra, Manoj K. (2007). Operations Management:
Processes and Value Chains. 8th Edition. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey:Pearson Prentice
Hall.
Lisboa, J. V., Gomes, C. F., & Yasin, M. M. (2012). Improving Organizational Efficiency: A
Comparison of Two Approaches to Aggregate Production Planning. International Journal Of
Management, 792-806.
Liu, Z., Chua, D., & Yeoh, K. (2011). Aggregate Production Planning for Shipbuilding with
Variation-Inventory Trade-Offs. International Journal Of Production Research, 49(20),
6249-6272. doi:10.1080/00207543.2010.527388.
Radwan, A., & Aarabi, Majid. (2011). Study of Implementing Zachman Framework for Modeling
Information Systems for Manufacturing Enterprises Aggregate Planning. Proceedings of the
2011 International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management. 9-
14.
Render, B., & Heizer, J. (2011). Operation Management. 10th Edition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Robbins, S.P., & Coulter, M.K. (2009). Management. 9th edition. New Jersey, USA: Pearson
Education.
Russell, Roberta S., & Taylor, Bernard W. (2011). Operations Management. 7th Edition. New Jersey:
Wiley.
Schroeder, R.D. (2008). Operations Management: Contemporary Concepts and Cases. 4th Edition.
McGraw Hill.
Sekaran, Uma. (2003). Research methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach. 4th Edition. USA:
Wiley.
Sillekens, T., Koberstein, A., & Suhl, L. (2011). Aggregate Production Planning in The Automotive
Industry with Special Consideration of Workforce Flexibility. International Journal of
Production Research, 49(17), 5055-5078.
Stevenson, W. (2009). Operations Management. 10th Edition. New York, USA: McGraw Hill.
Sukendar, Irwan., & Kristomi, Riki. (2008). Metoda Agregat Planning Heuristik Sebagai Perencanaan
dan Pengendalian Jumla Produksi untuk Minimasi Biaya. Prosidin Seminar Nasional Teknoin
2008. C107-C112.
Harian Ekonomi Neraca. 2013. Manisnya Bisnis Mainan Anak. Retrieved (12-08-2013) from
http://www.neraca.co.id
Tunas Bangsa. 2012. Permainan Mainan Anak-Anak Meningkat. Retrieved (12-02-2013) from
http://www.tubasmedia.com
Sandra Karina. 2012. Penjualan Mainan Edukatif Capai Rp60 Miliar. Retrieved (20-01-2014) from
http://www.okezone.com
Melinda Care. 2012. Manfaat Permainan Edukatif Untuk Anak. Retrieved (20-01-2014) from
http://www.melindahospital.com

WRITER’S BIOGRAPHY
Desty Natalia, was born in Pekanbaru, December 24, 1992. The writer obtained Bachelor (Sarjana –
S1) degree at Bina Nusantara University in Management major, School of Business Management in
2014. The writer is active in organization called HIMME.