{"id":14647,"date":"2026-05-05T09:09:28","date_gmt":"2026-05-05T07:09:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/optano.com\/?p=14647"},"modified":"2026-05-05T09:09:31","modified_gmt":"2026-05-05T07:09:31","slug":"insights-inventory-and-production-planning-chemistry","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/optano.com\/en\/media\/insight\/2\/insights-bestands-und-produktionsplanung-chemie\/","title":{"rendered":"Insights: Inventory and production planning in the chemical industry"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t

Inventory and production planning in the chemical industry<\/h1>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t

Why Excel reaches its limits with conflicting goals <\/h2>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

A high-priority order comes in at short notice. The desired product is important for the customer, but the current campaign in the plant has already started. Should production be brought forward, despite the risk of additional changeovers, more off-grades and new gaps in the rest of the plan? Or is it better to deliver from stock first and reduce safety stocks more quickly?<\/p>

It is precisely at points like these that it becomes clear why inventory and production planning in the chemical industry is not just a math problem. Service levels, stock levels, plant utilization and capital commitment are closely interlinked. What looks like a series of individual decisions in a spreadsheet is in practice an interrelated conflict of objectives.<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t

\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t

Stocks often show a coordination problem<\/h2>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

In planning, large inventories are often seen as a safety net. In many chemical companies, however, they are more a sign that decisions about production, supply and service are not properly coordinated. If safety stocks are increased in isolation, this improves the ability to deliver in the short term. At the same time, however, capital commitment increases and the actual cause of the uncertainty remains.<\/p>

This is precisely what is crucial for CFO-related issues: more inventory does not automatically create more robustness. It can also be an expression of planning that does not resolve conflicts of objectives, but merely buffers them. Capital is then tied up without operational management really becoming more stable.<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

\u201eWhat looks simple in Excel collides with changeovers, off-grades and bottlenecks in the plant.\u201c<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t

\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t

The apparent freedom in Excel does not exist in the reality of production<\/h2>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

In the chemical industry, planning is rarely freely adjustable. Before a plan is adjusted, fixed or preferred batch sizes, sequence-dependent changeovers, off-grade losses during product changeovers, tank and storage limits, bottleneck plants, raw material availability and delivery windows already have an effect. Every change at one point shifts the consequences at several others.<\/p>

This is especially true when an ongoing campaign needs to be interrupted in order to bring a product forward. This decision can often be quickly visualized in Excel: pull a quantity forward, reduce a stock, secure a deadline. The follow-up costs are more difficult to see. Additional changeovers take up capacity, transitions generate scrap or off-grade, downstream products are exposed to new risks, and the inventory effect shifts over several periods. The table then shows a decision, but not necessarily its full consequences.<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t

Disruptions make separate planning particularly vulnerable\n<\/h2>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

As soon as a plant breaks down at short notice or a raw material arrives late, the coordination effort increases dramatically. Stocks, production quantities, delivery commitments and often cross-location flows have to be reconciled. This is not only slow in separate tables. It also easily creates version conflicts and a false sense of security because individual tables appear consistent, but the overall plan no longer fits together.<\/p>

Particularly in an industry with limited scope, the quality of coordination itself becomes a decisive lever. Where buffers in systems and tanks are scarce, it is particularly easy to see whether planning has really been thought through in a coherent manner or whether it is only being maintained side by side.<\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t

\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t

Further interesting content<\/p>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t

\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t