| Course | MT435 Operations Management |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 10 |
| Paper type | Operations improvement proposal |
| Length | About 1,110 words, 7 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | BS in Business Administration |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for MT435 Unit 10
Group the Colors, Free an Hour: An MT435 Unit 10 Operations Improvement Proposal at the Constraint
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
MT435: Operations Management
Unit 10 Operations Improvement Proposal
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
Pacolet Bunk & Loft and every figure are composite, carried from Units 3, 4 and 9; the sources cited are real.
Executive Summary
The spray booth limits Pacolet's output to about 30.6 beds a day while sales book about 38. Six color changes a day consume 90 minutes of booth time. Grouping orders by color cuts the changes to two during the shift, frees 60 minutes and adds about 5.1 beds a day. At $265 of contribution a bed, that is about $337,700 a year, against $9,700 of one-time cost and about $3,878 a year of overtime. The change also delays the need for a second finishing shift, the costliest option in the Unit 4 plan.
Why This Change
Three findings from earlier units point to it. The Unit 3 bottleneck analysis showed the booth is the constraint, and that color changes are the larger of the two losses between its design rate and its actual rate. The Unit 9 lean review ranked waste at the booth first and found that the sprayers had already suggested grouping colors. And the Unit 4 capacity plan showed that every bed the booth gains reduces what must be outsourced or paid for with a second shift.
A change anywhere else would not add output. Speeding up sanding, for example, would cut labor but leave the booth's 30.6 beds a day unchanged, because, as Goldratt and Cox (2004) argued, only time gained at the constraint becomes output.
The Change
Today the booth sprays orders in due-date order, switching among clear coat, stains and paints as orders arrive, about six times a day at 15 minutes each.
Under color blocking, each day's booth schedule runs all clear-coat orders first, then stains, then paints. Clear coat goes first because any trace of it in a stain or paint is harmless, while traces of paint in clear coat would show. That leaves two changes during the shift: clear to stain, and stain to paint. The third flush, from paint back to clear for the next morning, moves to the end of the shift, when a sprayer stays about 45 minutes after the line stops to purge paint from the hoses and wash the gun tips.
Within each color block, orders still run in due-date order, the rule Unit 5 found best for keeping promises.
The Throughput Calculation
The booth has 450 minutes in a shift. Today, six changes take 90 minutes, leaving 360 minutes of spraying. At 11 minutes a bed, that is 32.7 beds, and after the 7 percent re-spray rate, about 30.6 beds of actual output.
With two changes in the shift, 30 minutes are lost, leaving 420 minutes of spraying. At 11 minutes a bed, that is 38.2 beds, and after re-sprays about 35.7.
The gain is about 5.1 beds a day, or about 1,274 a year over 250 working days. At $265 of contribution per bed, the annual gain is about $337,700.
Sixty minutes a day at the constraint are worth about $337,700 a year; the same hour at the router would be worth nothing.
Checking Demand and Downstream Capacity
The gain is real only if the beds can be sold and the stations after the booth can handle them. Sales book about 38 beds a day, so all 35.7 can be sold. Test assembly, the next constraint at about 56 beds a day, and every other downstream station have ample room. The booth would still be about 2.3 beds a day short of bookings, about 575 a year, which the Unit 4 plan's outsourcing can cover at much lower cost than before.
The switching point for a second finishing shift also moves. With the booth at 35.7 beds a day, outsourcing remains cheaper than a second shift until demand reaches about 48.8 beds a day, beyond the two-year forecast's peak of 46. The second shift may not be needed at all within the forecast.
Costs
One-time costs total about $9,700: $4,800 for quick-disconnect fittings on the paint lines, which shorten each change; $2,500 to set up the color-blocking rule in the scheduling software; and $2,400 to train the four sprayers and the scheduler. The recurring cost is the end-of-shift flush, about 45 minutes of overtime a day for one sprayer, about $3,878 a year.
Against the annual gain, the payback on the one-time cost is about ten days.
What the Sprayers Gain
The change also matters to the people who proposed it. The sprayers suggested grouping colors more than a year ago, and the Unit 9 review found the idea had never been tested. Running the trial on their suggestion, with them setting the block order and the flush routine, gives the people closest to the constraint a stake in its output. It also gives management a reason to ask them for the next idea, since the remaining two changes and the re-spray rate are both problems they see every day.
Risks
Color blocking means an order may wait up to most of a day for its color slot. For orders with tight dates, the scheduler can still break a block once a day if needed, at the cost of one extra change. A shift in the color mix, for example a surge in paint orders, would make the paint block longer but would not add changes. Shingo (1985) showed that changeover time can often be cut further once the steps are studied, so the quick-disconnect fittings may reduce the remaining two changes below 15 minutes, which would add output beyond this estimate.
Implementation
In week one, fit the quick-disconnects and set up the scheduling rule. In week two, train the sprayers and scheduler and run color blocks for three days as a trial. From week three, run color blocking every day. Hopp and Spearman (2011) stress that gains at a constraint should be confirmed with data rather than assumed, so the trial days and the first month will be measured against the baseline.
Measures
The trial will be judged on five figures: color changes per shift, booth output in beds per day, re-spray rate, the share of orders shipped by their due date and the number of beds waiting in front of the booth at the start of each shift. The target is two changes a shift, at least 35 beds a day and no fall in on-time shipping.
Recommendation
Approve color blocking, fund the $9,700 of one-time costs and begin the two-week trial next month.
References
Goldratt, E. M., & Cox, J. (2004). The goal: A process of ongoing improvement (3rd rev. ed.). North River Press.
Hopp, W. J., & Spearman, M. L. (2011). Factory physics (3rd ed.). Waveland Press.
Shingo, S. (1985). A revolution in manufacturing: The SMED system. Productivity Press.
What the MT435 Unit 10 assignment asks for
The final unit asks students to propose one operations improvement and prove its value. Instructors expect the change chosen by its effect on the constraint, since a change at a station with spare capacity adds little however well it is argued. The throughput gain should be calculated line by line from the constraint's available time, setups and rework, then priced at contribution per unit. The proposal must check that the extra output can be sold and that downstream stations can handle it. Costs should separate one-time and recurring amounts. Risks, an implementation plan with a trial and measures with targets are expected. The proposal should connect to earlier units, using their findings as its evidence, and end with a decision the reader can approve.
How the MT 435 Unit 10 example is put together
An executive summary of the sample gives the change, the gain and the cost. The case for color blocking over other options draws on the bottleneck, lean and capacity units, with Goldratt and Cox. The change is described step by step, including why clear coat runs first and how due dates are kept within blocks. The throughput calculation runs from booth minutes to beds to contribution, under a highlighted line on the value of an hour at the constraint. Demand and downstream capacity are checked, and the effect on the capacity plan is stated. Costs, risks with Shingo on further setup reduction, a section on the sprayers who proposed the idea, a three-week implementation with Hopp and Spearman and five measures follow.
Reading the MT435 Unit 10 grading rubric
Improvement proposals are usually graded on whether the gain is calculated at the constraint, and a change that speeds up a station with spare capacity earns little however well it is written. Throughput claims should be built line by line from available time, setups and rework, then priced. Rubrics reward checking that demand exists and downstream stations can absorb the output. Credit goes to separating one-time from recurring costs and computing payback. A trial with measures and targets shows the gain will be confirmed rather than assumed. Connecting to earlier units' findings earns synthesis marks. Naming risks and how they would be handled shows judgment, and an executive summary with a clear decision completes the proposal.
MT435 Unit 10 help: mistakes that cost points
The most frequent weak improvement proposal picks a change because it is popular in lean literature, such as a kanban system, without showing it acts on the constraint. Another common error claims the full theoretical gain without accounting for rework or remaining setups. Students often forget to check whether the extra output can be sold. Downstream stations are rarely examined, so a new constraint is missed. Costs are frequently one-time only, with recurring costs left out. Before submitting, trace your claimed gain back to minutes at the constraint and forward to beds shipped. If either link is missing, the proposal's main number is not yet supported.
Get an MT435 Unit 10 example written to your instructions
The facility your Unit 10 prompt describes, any earlier analysis worth building on, and the rubric make a complete request. A composite proposal returns choosing one change by its effect on the constraint, calculating the throughput gain line by line and checking demand and downstream capacity. No fee applies to an opening custom sample, usually ready in 24-48h. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More MT435 papers and BS in Business Administration samples
- MT435 Unit 1: Transformation System Board Post
- MT435 Unit 2: Process Flow Analysis
- MT435 Unit 3: Bottleneck Analysis
- MT435 Unit 4: Capacity Plan
- MT435 Unit 5: Job Scheduling Exercise
- MT435 Unit 6: Queueing Seminar Reflection
- MT435 Unit 7: Facility Layout Proposal
- MT435 Unit 8: Control Chart Analysis
- MT435 Unit 9: Lean Waste Review
- MT434 Unit 10: Distribution Plan
- MT433 Unit 10: Global Sourcing Strategy
- MT431 Unit 10: Mortgage Financing Recommendation
MT435 Unit 10 questions, answered
How do I calculate the throughput gain from an improvement?
Work at the constraint. Find how many minutes the change recovers or how much faster the step becomes, convert that into new capacity per day, then subtract rework or other losses to get actual output. Compare with current output for the gain, and multiply by contribution per unit only if demand exists for the extra units.
Can the proposal combine several changes?
It can, though many prompts ask for one change developed fully. If you combine changes, calculate each one's gain separately before adding them, since two changes at the same constraint may overlap. A single well-argued change with a clear calculation often scores better than several thinly supported ones placed side by side.
What belongs in the implementation section?
A short timeline, who is responsible, what equipment or training is needed, and how success will be measured. A pilot period with a defined end and a decision point makes the proposal more credible. Name one or two risks and what would be done if the expected gain does not appear.
Where can I find a free MT435 Unit 10 sample paper?
This page holds the full MT435 Unit 10 proposal, grouping colors at a bed shop's spray booth to free sixty minutes a day at the constraint.
How much does color blocking add in the MT435 Unit 10 sample?
About 5.1 beds a day, from 30.6 to 35.7, roughly 1,274 a year or about $337,700 of contribution for $9,700 of one-time cost.