云。描述性分析。规范分析。机器学习。协同工作流程。假设分析。我在参加会议时发现‘planning’ is bandied about, but few technologists dive into the details. We have lost the ability to have a discussion on the fundamentals. It drives a 供应链 规划 gal like me crazy. Here I share some insights on 规划. For everyone trying to navigate new technology options, this is an important question.
回顾
The traditional world of 供应链 规划 managed inputs into a data model to drive outputs. While we can argue about which technologies have the best role-based usability and 如果 analysis, the key to the selection of 供应链 规划 is the fit of the data model and the ability to drive an output that drives business value. A mistake that many companies make is a focus on implementation. Instead, it was about fine-tuning and model configuration. The goal should not be about speed to implementation. Instead, it should be about the “模型输出成功” to drive value.
With the evolution of Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) platforms and the zealous implementations of many business consultants, the basics of 规划 were lost. As companies focused on the hype cycle of the “集成供应链模型”这些项目既庞大又复杂。 IT部门对实施的关注通常使业务领导团队拥有他们无法使用的工具。
进化问题
如今，客户端服务器技术供应商正在转向基于云的部署。但是，像JDA，Logility，Oracle和SAP这样的公司都受到软件维护升级，对客户的承诺和发展的阻碍。市场上最大的麻烦之一是APO的SAP演进以及路线图的不清晰。尽管缺少功能，但APO仍然成为市场领导者，而IBP路线图使情况更糟。
同时，正在寻找前进之路的公司正陷入困境“schema on read”技术，认知计算，规范分析和机器学习，这在很大程度上使传统的计划世界过时了。传统的引擎基于线性优化。随着供应链变得越来越复杂（随着项目的增加以及全球化带来的需求不旺），它们变得越来越非线性。这需要更深入的建模和渠道数据的使用。线性优化假设数据为正态分布。对于不正常的分布，机器学习和认知计算正在受到关注。 （此图像的信用归于ToolsGroup。我喜欢他们的图像。）重点是，蓝色区域表示高容量项目，通常表示基于正态分布的统计数据。传统的供应链引擎假定正态分布，正态分布正逐渐成为较小的数据集。
图1.供应链的长尾需要使用非线性优化的更深引擎
另外，随着业务变得更加复杂，资产被更多地利用，并且业务具有更多的制造约束。基于约束的供应需要对制造和网络建模进行更深入的建模。业务团队努力保持熟练的计划人员。需要从供应计划的核心计划领域到具有成熟的协作工作流程和业务领导能力的连接“what-if”能力。在一个全球性组织中，通常需要三个核心角色，如图2所示。核心计划者需要深入的模型，而业务用户则需要“what-if”与模型连接的功能以及“协作工作流程。”核心计划者需要深度建模并访问干净的主数据。对于大多数公司来说，这是一个问题。传统的高级计划侧重于核心计划人员，但业务负责人和高级管理人员不重视可用性。 Anaplan，Halo和Kinaxis等技术可提高这些关键角色的可见性。
图2.规划需求随角色而变化
技术加速
随着我们的前进，关于描述性分析和数据获取能力的讨论很多。还有很多炒作“connected 规划.” However, I scratch my head. How can we have connected 规划 if the organizations are not aligned, and do not have a balanced scorecard that crosses across the company to drive functional 对准?
图3.组织一致性
Collaborative sales 规划 introduced in the last decade increased error and bias. Asking sales for a forecast is vastly different than sensing the market based on channel data. To win, companies must get aligned cross-functionally on the role of the budget, and drive 对准 on the strategic plan.
技术市场正在朝两个方向发展（通过认知计算进行更深入的建模，以及通过描述性分析实现更广泛的可视性）。在这种演变中，混乱充斥着。这包括 hands-free 规划 with “schema on read” machine learning 易于使用的描述性分析“what-if analysis”这与更深层次的建模无关。这些是相反的拉力，实际上需要将它们放在一起。随着2025年SAP迁移计划的混乱，越来越多的公司在市场上寻求解决方案。狂热很高，人们对技术选择的困惑也越来越多。当您尝试浏览市场时’t forget the basics.
规划基础
每当有人使用该术语“real-time 规划” raise a red flag. Planning is not, and should not be, real-time. Attempting to do 规划 in real-time will add nervousness and error into the 规划 processes. 唐’t confuse sensing and translation with 规划. Avoid any process that is described as real-time 规划.
存在计划时间范围是有原因的。它们是全球计划管理与地方计划管理的自然界限。最好的团队定义治理，并且在时间范围内清晰明了。有一些自然过程需要战术视野来进行采购，购买运输采购以及销售和运营计划（S&OP）。在战术上，跨工厂转移和调整生产负荷至关重要。如果您是地区性公司或小型公司，则战术规划并不那么关键。最好的公司擅长战略网络设计，并将其转化为全球计划团队，该团队将网络设置为18-24个月的较长时间。擅长战术规划对于控制成本至关重要。较短的时间范围（0-12周）受益于更快的计划计划周期，但短期运营计划不足以管理供应链。最好是辅以战略和战术计划。此外，认知计算和工作流程的重新定义“multiple ifs” to “multiple thens”是对可承诺额（ATP），分配和库存管理工作流程的重新定义。 唐’t make the mistake of eliminating time horizons. Use new technology options to improve hand-offs and visibility and reduce 规划 batch cycles.
测试但验证。使用更深入的引擎和工作流程可以改善结果，但前提是我们必须进行测试和学习。 Never treat a 规划 project as an implementation. Test. Learn. Evolve. So often, companies forget to configure the system and test the output of the 规划 engines.
Sales-driven processes are not 市场驱动. Marketing-driven processes are not 市场驱动. Market-driven processes are outside in starting with the customer and translating data back into the organization as a usable demand signal. The best results happen when the focus is on the market, using channel data, not on functional 规划. 积极地建立由内而外的流程。
在考虑选项时，请务必提问题“What is 规划?” 唐’t accept historic views of 规划 limitations, but don’不要忘记基础知识。而且，如果您有任何疑问，请告诉我们。
罗拉,
真的很重要。我有几点意见。
1.在APO上
“市场上最大的弊端之一是SAP向APO的发展以及路线图缺乏明确性。尽管缺乏功能，但APO仍是市场领导者，而IBP路线图使情况更糟。” – Your Quote
So one point of clarification. I think your conclusion is correct. But 树液 can claim to have a very large amount of functionality. In fact, I think in total, APO must have the largest amount of functionality in the 供应链 规划 market under one vendor. APO is a seemingly limitless bucket of menu items (transactions) that you can go into with 11 modules in total (most of them barely implemented, with only four broadly implemented with any success).
树液 顾问将对此进行反击。从技术上讲，它们是正确的。
但是，APO还导致具有最难使用的功能和最多已损坏的功能。 APO具有大多数无法使用且永远无法使用的功能。在这个分数上，我可以’t imagine how any other 供应链 规划 vendor could come close. The reason why gets into how 树液 development is setup, which is another discussion.
自从首次引入APO以来，浪费在APO项目上的总金额令人鼓舞。
当然，APO成为领导者仅出于一个原因。由于主要咨询公司的腐败，使它无济于事。因此，这应该被视为不利于最大的咨询公司的另一个缺点。
2.实时计划
树液 再次非常负责推动市场思考瞬时结果。但是还有另一个Kinaxis整体营销信息已经执行“RapidResponse”他们驱动相同类型的思维。高管们喜欢听这个。即使在这个阶段，我所遇到的高管人数仍然很少，这些高管会希望您正确解释将计划作为有条不紊的做法。这是为什么“planning”并没有大踏步前进。软件和硬件越来越好，但是使用它们的环境变得越来越被动。与我进入工作市场时相比，事情更快，更分散，更多的是短期重点，还有更多的反计划环境。
这个概念是使用瞬时Feed和“increasing rapidity,” we should be doing 规划 (and ML with 大数据) in real time, while we 推特, Instagram and 脸书, and do so in a self-driving Tesla so we can multitask and save time. Bill McDermott and many other software executives, some of whom are nothing more than trumped up salesmen (I would say people to be gender sensitive, but they are all men) speak like this all the time and the IT media lap it up. Due to smartphones attentions, human spans declined below goldfish around two years ago, and are headed south.
Overall, what you are talking about is sanity, understanding the underpinnings of good 规划 and not marketing hyperbole. So for a lot of people, this is a big turnoff.
Shaun. Most consultants know the 企业资源计划-centric 规划 tools and not the rest of the market. While 树液 has a lot of features, usability and depth of the engines are an issue. Many people confuse the urgent with the important. Planning is about the important. Kinaxis intent was running a quick batch job to give a quick input in a market where engines take a long time to run. Thanks for your comments.