Facility layout and scheduling: In which layout is production scheduling simpler, enabling high output and high labour efficiency?

Introduction / Context:
Facility layout decisions impact throughput, scheduling, material handling, and labour productivity. A product (line) layout arranges resources in the sequence of operations for one or a few high-volume products, whereas process layouts group similar machines, and fixed position layouts keep the product stationary.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• The goal is to simplify scheduling and achieve high output with high labour efficiency.
• Products are standardized or have limited variants.
• Demand is steady enough to balance the line.

Concept / Approach:
In a product layout, each workstation performs a fixed, repetitive task; jobs flow in a single, predefined path. Line balancing and takt-based planning simplify scheduling. Workers specialize, changeovers are minimized, and material flow is streamlined, raising output and labour efficiency compared with process or fixed-position layouts.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Empirical results in assembly lines (e.g., consumer goods, automotive subassemblies) show predictable schedules and high throughput when demand is stable.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Process layout: flexible but complex routing and scheduling; higher WIP.
• Fixed position layout: suited for large projects; scheduling is component/crew oriented and complex.
• Combination layout: useful when needed, but typically more complex to schedule than a pure line.

Common Pitfalls:
Trying to use a line layout for highly customized products; ignoring balance losses and bottlenecks that reduce theoretical efficiency.

Final Answer:
Product (line) layout