ThoughtWorthSharing Business Quintiq 

In a world where everything is possible, and the sky is the limit (read: the world of DELMIA Quintiq), it can be easy to forget that sometimes less = more. That keeping things simple and sticking to the standard might be better than customization and adding more functionality.

The story of the Mouse

To illustrate why, I would like to introduce the story of the 'Mouse'. Even though this sounds like a sweet little fairy tale, it is actually about the ‘Panzerkampfwagen VIII’, with nickname ‘Maus’. This German tank, commissioned by Adolf Hitler, was built during World War II. Hitler wanted to have the biggest and strongest tank ever, which would have the ability to punch holes in all enemy fortifications.

His engineers went to work. Their first design, weighing in at 100 tons, contained a 150mm and a 20mm gun. However, Hitler insisted to go even bigger and demanded a change to a 128mm and a 75mm gun. This setup would certainly meet the requirements, as it would be powerful enough to destroy all Allied armored fighting vehicles then in service.

There was only one drawback to all this power: it was very heavy. Including guns, the tank weighted 188 tons. There was simply no engine available, which was strong enough to power it. They had to design a new hybrid engine, but even that only managed to get the tank to a maximum speed of 13 km/h (8.1 mph). And an even bigger problem: it was too heavy to cross bridges, making it useless in the battle field!

In the end, only two prototypes were build, which were only used once. A great example of why sometimes building bigger and stronger, is not always better!

Back to planning & optimization

This lesson also holds for the world of planning and optimization. Where it is also wise to ask ourselves: “yes, we can add this feature, but should we? “
For example: yes, we can create a detailed production schedule for the next month, but should we? It would mean showing a lot of data, making it difficult for a planner to get an overview. And is all of that detail needed? Will it enable the planner to make better decisions? Or will it just lead to endless revisions? It might be better to decide to limit the horizon of a detailed schedule for the next couple of days. Not because we are unable to look further ahead, but because a longer horizon will reduce the value you can get out of the planning system.

This “yes we can, but should we?” question is relevant for all kinds of features:

• Should we plan (any) non-bottleneck resources?
• Should we make the system completely dummy proof?
• Should an optimizer be able to handle a case that only happens once per year?
• And many more…

I am not saying that you should never customize and enhance. There might be very good reasons to deviate from the standard. What is important is to remain critical and ask to right questions to avoid building a 'Mouse'.