Production planning is, to some extent, similar to arranging a railway timetable. If one train arrives late, passengers wait or complain to the conductor because they missed their connection, the staff reacts under stress, and the following trains must change their route. Factories work in exactly the same way – except that instead of wagons, we have orders, machines and people who have to work in a rhythm that can actually be maintained.
As production grows, so does the number of variables and possible combinations. It then becomes clear that manual management of the production plan stops working.
This is why more and more plants are looking for ways to make planning a predictable, data-driven process that is resistant to everyday changes. And digital APS/MES tools not only help organize the “timetable” for the entire organization but also verify whether the organization has enough machines and resources to execute the plan at the intended pace.

Production planning is a part of the production portal (MES system) that schedules production orders over time and across machines.

In theory, the planning process does not seem more complicated than brewing a cup of tea. All you need to do is define what you want to produce, within what time, and how to distribute the load across machines and people. In practice, however, planning is not that simple. It consists of:

In an ideal scenario, these three areas are coordinated in one system, but in many factories they are handled in different tools and by different departments. The result? Often no one knows whether the plan is feasible at all.
And what does a good planner need to complete their task? Certainly:

Only with such resources can work be realistically scheduled over time and production predictability ensured.

Several risks stand in the way of effective production planning. Let’s look at the most significant ones.

Most problems do not stem from a planner’s lack of knowledge, but from a lack of information. ERP data is often incomplete or binary, while machine data is unavailable because lines lack sensors or documentation enabling data reading.

The second category of challenges is shifting priorities. New orders, material shortages, downtimes… Every plant knows this all too well. These are situations where at 10:00 it turns out that the plan from 8:00 is already outdated. Excel becomes a battlefield rather than a planning tool. At scale, this approach always leads to chaos.

Another limitation is insufficient resources: tools, molds, or people with the right qualifications. If the system does not show their availability, the planner may create a schedule that cannot physically be executed.

And finally – changeovers. For many plants, this is one of the most critical planning elements. A change of recipe, settings or tools can completely alter the real execution time of an order. In the explitia.APS module, changeovers are a separate function, and the Gantt chart clearly displays them as part of operations.

For a production plan to have a chance of success, it does not have to be perfect – because the goal is not a beautiful presentation, but a plan that reflects the real capabilities of the factory. Therefore, it must take into account several elements:

Machines operate at different speeds, and catalog data rarely matches reality. Only integration with MES can verify the actual machine performance compared to the plan.

A good plan specifies which operators and which tools can be assigned to particular orders.

In many industries, these two variables determine whether the plan “adds up” or not.

A well-described order includes the product, quantity and structure of operations. Exporting, importing or creating orders directly in explitia allows planners to work with one single source of truth.

Planning cannot end at sequencing – it must be linked to execution. In the explitia.APS module, order status is read directly from machines and, after production, the system automatically sends information on the number of units produced back to ERP.

Unfortunately, it often happens that the plan goes one way and reality another. Based on explitia implementations, it is easy to identify several recurring patterns and causes of plan failure:

Automation of production planning is not about digitizing an Excel file. It is about building a consistent ecosystem in which:

In the explitia.APS module, these three areas merge into one environment in which the planner sees machine load, changeover times, order sequence and potential conflicts. As a result, the plan is not a document detached from reality, but an operational tool that lives together with production.

The most visible effects of digital planning implementation are:

Although automation has many advantages, it is not a solution for every company. It only makes sense when a plant is at least partially digitalized and production is large-scale and multi-stage. It loses its purpose in small plants, without ERP or without machine signals.

The development of the APS module is moving in one direction: automatic planning, in which:

This is a natural step. On production floors, the planner’s role will remain important but will evolve – from a person who builds the plan to someone who supervises intelligent tools.

Effective production planning in a medium or large factory is no longer possible without a single, cohesive system that brings together data, resources and execution. Digital APS/MES tools not only simplify the planner’s work – they restore predictability, which was difficult to achieve manually.

Therefore, if your organization wants to shorten the production cycle, improve timeliness and reduce the number of errors, start with an analysis of the planning process. This is the first step toward building a factory that can react to changes quickly and in an organized way.