Yetkinlik Bazlı Operatör Atama Problemi için Atama Bazlı Yetkinlik Ölçümü

Abstract

Bu çalışmada yetkinlik değerlerinin baştan bilinmediği bir durumda operatörlerin operasyonlara atanması için farklı atama yöntemleri karşılaştırılmıştır. 3 farklı atama yöntemlerinin denenebilmesi için 10, 30 ve 50 operatör ve operasyon olan problemler oluşturulmuş, operatörlerin yetkinlik değerlerindeki değişkenlik için 3 farklı seviye (σ=1, 3, 5) belirlenmiş ve her bir problem örneği problem boyutundaki operatör sayısının 3 katı uzunluğunda çalışma dönemi temel alınarak 10 tekrar ile çalıştırılmıştır. Rastgele (R) atama yönteminde her gün operatörler rastgele atanmıştır. Sistematik (S) atama yönteminde her gün operatörler sırasıyla tüm operasyonlara atanmış ve çalışma dönemi boyunca bu döngü 3 defa tekrarlanmıştır. Sistematik Optimum (SO) atama yönteminde ise deneme dönemi olarak ifade edilebilecek ilk n gün n operatör sırasıyla n ayrı operasyonda denendikten sonra elde edilen yetkinlik değerlerine göre geri kalan günlerde optimum atamalar yapılmıştır. Bu yöntemler atama yapılan pozisyon sayısının seyri, toplam atama puanının seyri ve hesaplanan ile gerçekteki yetkinlik değeri arasındaki ortalama mutlak sapma değerleri açısından karşılaştırılmıştır. Ayrıca SO yöntemi için deneme dönemini arttırmanın etkisi incelenmiştir. Toplam atama puanı açısından SO atama yöntemi diğer iki yönteme göre anlamlı farklar oluştururken, ortalama mutlak sapma açısından herhangi bir yöntemin diğerlerine baskın olmadığı tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca SO yönteminde deneme dönemini uzatmanın ortalama atama puanını anlamlı ölçüde azalttığı, buna karşın ortalama mutlak sapma açısından anlamlı bir iyileşme olmadığı görülmüştür.

Keywords

• Operatör
• Atama
• Yetkinlik

Assignment-Based Competency Measurement for the Competency-Based Operator Assignment Problem

Abstract

This study compares different assignment methods for assigning operators to operations when initial competency values are not known in advance. To evaluate 3 different assignment methods, problem instances with sizes of 10, 30, and 50 operators and operations were generated, three different variability levels in operators' competence values (σ = 1, 3, 5) were determined and based on an operation period equivalent to three times the number of operators in the problem size 10 replications were performed for each problem instance. In the Random (R) assignment method, operators were assigned randomly each day. The Systematic (S) assignment method involved cyclically assigning each operator to all operations in sequence, with this cycle repeated three times over the working period. In the Systematic Optimum (SO) assignment method, which incorporates a trial period, n operators were sequentially tested on n distinct operations for the first n days; subsequently, optimal assignments were executed for the remaining days based on the acquired competence values. These methods were compared across several metrics: the progression of assigned positions, the progression of total assignment scores, and the mean absolute deviation between calculated and actual competency values. Furthermore, the impact of extending the trial period was analyzed for the SO method. The results indicate that the SO assignment method generated significant differences compared to the other two methods in terms of the total assignment score, whereas no single method demonstrated dominance over the others regarding the mean absolute deviation. Additionally, extending the trial period in the SO method significantly decreased the average assignment score, while yielding no statistically significant improvement in the mean absolute deviation.

Keywords

• Operator
• Assignment
• Competency

References

1. Azizi, N., Zolfaghari, S., & Liang, M. (2010). Modeling job rotation in manufacturing systems: The study of employee's boredom and skill variations. International journal of production economics, 123(1), 69-85.
2. Azizi, N., & Liang, M. (2013). An integrated approach to worker assignment, workforce flexibility acquisition, and task rotation. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 64(2), 260-275.
3. Bagheri, M., & Bashiri, M. (2014). A new mathematical model towards the integration of cell formation with operator assignment and inter-cell layout problems in a dynamic environment. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 38(4), 1237-1254.
4. Cattrysse, D. G., & Van Wassenhove, L. N. (1992). A survey of algorithms for the generalized assignment problem. European journal of operational research, 60(3), 260-272.
5. Cebeci, Ç. (2022). Atölye tipi üretimde tezgahlara operatör atanması probleminin yetkinlik analizi tabanlı macar algoritması ile çözümü, Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Sakarya Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
6. Chien, C. F., Zheng, J. N., & Lin, Y. J. (2014). Determining the operator-machine assignment for machine interference problem and an empirical study in semiconductor test facility. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 25, 899-911.
7. Chiles, W. D., & Alluisi, E. A. (1979). On the specification of operator or occupational workload with performance-measurement methods. Human Factors, 21(5), 515-528.
8. Chu, P. C., & Beasley, J. E. (1997). A genetic algorithm for the generalised assignment problem. Computers & Operations Research, 24(1), 17-23.

9. Dube, R., & Elsayed, E. A. (1979). A multi-machine labor assignment for variable operator service times. Computers & Operations Research, 6(3), 147-154.
10. Egilmez, G., Erenay, B., & Süer, G. A. (2014). Stochastic skill-based manpower allocation in a cellular manufacturing system. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 33(4), 578-588.
11. Ferjani, A., Ammar, A., Pierreval, H., & Elkosantini, S. (2017). A simulation-optimization based heuristic for the online assignment of multi-skilled workers subjected to fatigue in manufacturing systems. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 112, 663-674.
12. Guillaume, R., Houé, R., & Grabot, B. (2014). Robust competence assessment for job assignment. European Journal of Operational Research, 238(2), 630-644.
13. Hachicha, R. M., Dafaoui, El M. & El Mhamedi, A. (2010, December). Assignment problem formulation under competence and preference constraints. In 2010 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (pp. 1864-1868). IEEE.
14. Korytkowski, P. (2017). Competences-based performance model of multi-skilled workers with learning and forgetting. Expert Systems with Applications, 77, 226-235.
15. Kuhn, H. W. (1955). The Hungarian method for the assignment problem. Naval research logistics quarterly, 2(1‐2), 83-97.
16. Kuo, Y., & Yang, T. (2007). Optimization of mixed-skill multi-line operator allocation problem. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 53(3), 386-393.
17. Kuo, Y., & Liu, C. C. (2017). Operator assignment in a labor-intensive manufacturing cell considering inter-cell manpower transfer. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 110, 83-91.
18. Kuo, Y., Chen, Y. P., & Wang, Y. C. (2018). Operator assignment with cell loading and product sequencing in labour-intensive assembly cells–a case study of a bicycle assembly company. International Journal of Production Research, 56(16), 5495-5510.
19. Malachowski, B., & Korytkowski, P. (2016). Competence-based performance model of multi-skilled workers. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 91, 165-177.
20. Munkres, J. (1957). Algorithms for the assignment and transportation problems. Journal of the society for industrial and applied mathematics, 5(1), 32-38.
21. Peters, M. L., & Zelewski, S. (2005). Competence and Preference-based Workplace Assignment: An Application of a Weighted, Non-pre-emptive and Pre-emptive Goal Programming Model. In Integrating Human Aspects in Production Management: IFIP TC5/WG5. 7 Proceedings of the International Conference on Human Aspects in Production Management 5–9 October 2003, Karlsruhe, Germany (pp. 31-43). Springer US.
22. Salvendy, G., & Stewart, G. K. (1975). The prediction of operator performance on the basis of performance tests and biological measures. AIIE Transactions, 7(4), 379-387.
23. Stafford Jr, E. F. (1988). An Optimal Solution Technique For The Operator-Machine Assi. Production and Inventory Management Journal, 29(3), 25.
24. Süer, G. A. (1996). Optimal operator assignment and cell loading in labor-intensive manufacturing cells. Computers & industrial engineering, 31(1-2), 155-158.
25. Süer, G. A., & Tummaluri, R. R. (2008). Multi-period operator assignment considering skills, learning and forgetting in labour-intensive cells. International Journal of Production Research, 46(2), 469-493.
26. Triggs, D. D., & King, P. M. (2000). Job rotation. Professional safety, 45(2), 32.
27. Wittrock, R. J. (1992). Note—Operator Assignment and the Parametric Preflow Algorithm. Management science, 38(9), 1354-1359.
28. Yang, T., Fu, H. P., & Yang, C. (2002). A simulation-based dynamic operator assignment strategy considering machine interference-a case study on integrated circuit chip moulding operations. Production Planning & Control, 13(6), 541-551.
29. Zhang, J. H., Peng, X. D., Liu, H., Raisch, J., & Wang, R. B. (2013). Classifying human operator functional state based on electrophysiological and performance measures and fuzzy clustering method. Cognitive neurodynamics, 7, 477-494.