This article was downloaded by: [University of Saskatchewan Library]

On: 26 January 2015, At: 15:35

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer
House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal of Management Science and

Engineering Management
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tmse20

Combining the theory of constraints with system

dynamics: A general model (case study of the
subsidized milk industry)
a

Hossein Mohammadi , Mehdi Ghazanfari , Hamed Nozari & Omid Shafiezad

Department of Industrial Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology,

Tehran, Iran
Published online: 29 May 2014.

Click for updates

To cite this article: Hossein Mohammadi, Mehdi Ghazanfari, Hamed Nozari & Omid Shafiezad (2014): Combining the
theory of constraints with system dynamics: A general model (case study of the subsidized milk industry), International
Journal of Management Science and Engineering Management, DOI: 10.1080/17509653.2014.920123
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17509653.2014.920123

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of
the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied
upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall
not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other
liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

International Journal of Management Science and Engineering Management, 2014

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17509653.2014.920123

Combining the theory of constraints with system dynamics: A general model

(case study of the subsidized milk industry)*
Hossein Mohammadi*, Mehdi Ghazanfari, Hamed Nozari and Omid Shafiezad
Department of Industrial Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran
(Received 2 February 2013; final version received 8 January 2014)

Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 15:35 26 January 2015

This article discusses multi-methodology approaches. The authors explain that multi-methodology approaches assist in
creating a complementary understanding of complexity through specific processes. A new Mohammadi Ghazanfari model
is proposed for combining the theory of constraints with systems dynamics to deal with soft problems. This model consists
of two phases. The first phase is the appreciation and analysis of the problem. The second phase includes assessment and
evaluation actions. The first phase is described using a subsidized milk industry study in Iran.
Keywords: theory of constraints; thinking process; system dynamics; evaporating clouds; causal loop diagrams
JEL Classification: I0; L0; P0; Q0

1. Introduction
The development of multi-methodology approaches has
received attention over recent years. In this paper, we look
to display how the unique tools, methods and methodologies known as the Theory of Constraints (TOC) can be
accommodated to make perfect the System Dynamics (SD).
The TOC is a management philosophy first introduced by
Goldratt and Cox (1984) in their book The goal. As a
result, the current theory is based on the idea that every
system has a few limitations to achieving its goals and that
there is always at least one limitation in any system. The
TOC is composed of a considerable body of knowledge
which may be summarized as including operations strategy
tools, performance measurement systems, and Thinking
Process (TP) tools (Gupta, 2003). The TOC method for
identifying and solving organizational problems is called
TP. TP tools include the various tree diagrams, evaporating
clouds, and audit processes/guidelines such as categories of
legitimate reservation and layers of resistance (Dettmer,
1997; Scheinkopf, 1999; Smith, 2000). The TOC approach
in change management requires answering three essential
questions (see Table 1).
The Theory of Constraints Thinking Process (TOCTP)
involves a set of six logical tools that create a structure for
understanding the current situation of organizations and
projects, and for determining the optimal strategy to
achieve the desired goals. Goldratt (1990) outlined that
there are two approaches to finding root causes: the first is
the typical CRT approach and the second is the EC
approach. An EC diagram is a conflict statement with a
common objective but no apparent solution. Next consider
whether the injections will direct desirable effects. With
the injections and the logical cause-and-effect relationships, the desired effects can be connected and the future

*Corresponding author. Email: Hossein_mohammadi@ind.iust.

ac.ir; Tel: 98-912-7972574; Fax: 98-21-88782485
q 2014 International Society of Management Science and Engineering Management

outcome will be developed. This technique is called

building the future reality tree. The prerequisite tree gives
a plan for implementing the solution found in the previous
step. In fact, the PRT is a logical tool for determining
the barriers preventing the implementation of existing
solutions. The prerequisite tree uses the required logic
and alternatively asks What is absolutely needed? Also,
the goal in TRT is the implementation of change.
The applications of the TOC philosophy and TOCTP are
classified in Table 2.
Systems Dynamics (SD), originally known as industrial dynamics, is a creation of Jay Forrester in the 1960s
at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Forrester,
1961). SD aims to predict the behavior of a system, and for
doing this it depends on the use of a model which must
contain the complication of a complex structure and the
various feedback loops that link each element within that
structure (Nuhoglu, 2010). The SD process follows three
stages, which can be summarized as follows.
(a) Understanding the situation/problem definition.
(b) Model conceptualization/model building.
(c) Running the simulation model/using the results.
In general, papers that studied the combination of TOC
with SD are summarized in Table 3.
The newly proposed model consists of two phases. The
first phase is the appreciation and analysis of the problem.
The second phase includes the assessment and evaluation
actions. The first phase of the Mohammadi Ghazanfari
(M-G) model using the subsidized milk industry study is
explained. The implementation of the second phase is
beyond the scope of this article. There are two important
issues about the appreciation and analysis of the problem.
First, the roots of conflicts within the problem will be
detected. Second, the variables and their impact on
each other will be identified in order to understand the
problem better. These issues have been investigated by

2
Table 1.

H. Mohammadi et al.
Thinking process steps.

Tools of the logical thinking process Change step

Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 15:35 26 January 2015

Current Reality Tree (CRT),

What to change?
Evaporating Clouds (EC)
Future Reality Tree (FRT),
What to change to?
Negative Branch Reservation (NBR)
Prerequisite Tree (PRT),
How to cause the change?
Transition Tree (TRT)

the Evaporating Clouds (EC) and Causal Loop Diagramming (CLD) tools.
In this paper, we propose a general M-G model for
combining the TOCTP with SD to deal with soft issues.
To do this at the practitioner level, the necessity for clarity
about the characteristics, ability to replace or complementarity of different methodologies has been addressed
by the progression of systematically arranging systems and
frameworks. Here, we use the work of Mingers (1997a,
1997b, 2000, 2003) and Mingers and Brocklesby (1997).
We look for how the particular methods known as
TOCTP can be used to complement CLD. We map conflicts

Table 2.

(1) Proposed general model of M-G that shows combining

TOC with SD.
(2) Defining the problem of the subsidized milk industry
in Iran as a soft problem.

Application of the TOC philosophy and TOCTP.

TOC
EC CRT FRT NBR PRT TRT CLR perspective Review Case study

References
Reid and Cormier (2003)
Scoggin, Segelhorst, and Reid (2003)
Chaudhari and Mukhopadhyay (2003)
Ritson and Waterfield (2005).
Walker and Cox (2006)
Umble, Umble, and Murakami (2006)
Lloyd, Taylor, and
Thomas (2008)
Lacerda, Cassel, and Rodrigues (2010)
Chou, Lu, and
Tang (2012)
Dalci and Kosan (2012)
Rahman (1998)
Blackstone (2001)
Watson, Blackstone, and
Gardiner (2007)
Kim, Mabin, and Davies (2008)
Gupta and Snyder (2009)
Reid (2007)
Fekri, Shafiabady, Nooranipour,
and Ahghar (2012)
Naor, Bernardes, and Coman (2013)
Tsou (2013)
Zhao, Feng, Chu, and Ma (2014)

Table 3.

in the subsidized milk industry by EC. Modeling the

problem situation as an EC diagram not only emphasizes
the acceptance of the systems perspective, but also
describes the assumptions that underpin conflicts in EC.
Next, according to the knowledge gained through drawing
EC, CLD is drawn. This diagram presents relationships that
are difficult to describe verbally, because normal language
presents interrelations in linear cause-and-effect chains,
while the diagram shows that the actual system has circular
chains of cause-and-effect. We choose here to draw
attention to how TOC methods may complement those of
SD in building an understanding of the problem situation.
However, for combining two tools, the philosophical
foundation of Mabin, Davies, and Cox (2006) has been
applied. In particular, the items that distinguish this paper
can be summarized as follows.

Mexican food restaurant

Organizations production facility
Poultry industry
Mental health services
Large service company
Hitachi tool engineering
Invoicing system of an oil and
gas firm
Institution of Higher Education
Electronic operational process
for sales
Hotel management

Combined approach: TOC with SD.

References
Sterman, Forrester, Graham, and Senge (1983)
Reid and Koljonen (1999)
Davies, Mabin, and Cox (2004)
Mabin et al. (2006)
Wixson and Mills (2003)
Politou and Georgiadis (2008)
Sadat (2009)
Latorre, Roberts, and Riley (2010)

Performance
Simulation
EC/CRT DBRs measurement FRT/NBR PRT/TRT CLR CLD model/flow diagram

Theory of constraints/system dynamics

evaluation actions. At this stage, considering that we are

looking for creative or anticipated solutions, simulation or
FRT is used. Details of the proposed M-G model can be seen
in Figure 1. In particular, to describe the first phase of the
model, a case study is used. The case study relates to the
subsidized milk industry. The implementation of the second
phase is beyond the scope of this article.

Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 15:35 26 January 2015

(3) Application of CLDs part of SD and EC tools of

TOCTP in the problem of the subsidized milk industry
for the appreciation and analysis of the problem.
2. M-B frameworks for mapping and classifying
methodologies
Using a two-dimensional grid mapping the appropriateness
of different methodologies in different contexts, a
foundation for linking the methodology to problem content
and problem-solving activity can be provided by the
original M-B framework. The first dimension is regarding
the problem domain, particularly the nature of the world
being examined be it social, personal or material and
the second relates to the methodology, particularly the
conceptually distinct but highly related phases of
intervention. Phases of intervention are depicted within
the M-B framework. In Table 4, phases of intervention and
problem domain related to EC are given (Davies, Mabin, &
Balderstone, 2005).
Also, Mabin et al. (2006) examined the origin of
different domain of problems with CLD. Boldface
indicates the domains of the problem with the intervention
phase approach (Table 5).
3.

4.

Subsidized milk industry in Iran

Milk is an excellent source of vitamins and minerals,

particularly calcium. It has long been recognized for its
important role in bone health. Nutritionists recommend
that milk and other dairy products should be consumed
daily as part of a balanced diet.
Consumption of milk and dairy products is associated
with numerous health benefits including glowing skin,
healthy bones and teeth, weight loss, less stress and a
healthy body. Currently, the annual average consumption
of milk per person in the world is 180 kg, and in developed
countries it is about 300 kg. Unfortunately, Irans milk
consumption per capita is about 100 kg per year.
So, per capita consumption of milk in a country is a
sign of development, improving the social, public health,
economic development and health of the society. An
important issue is the payment or non-payment of subsidy
for milk in Iran. Some claim that subsidies to increase per
capita consumption of milk will bring about benefits from
the positive effects of milk consumption. In contrast, some
people think that such payments are inappropriate and
believe prior methods should be corrected. Hence, this soft
problem is used to verify the proposed approach.

Proposed model for the soft problem

Studies show that there is no comprehensive model that

combines TOC with SD as described. A comprehensive
model would be provided to help analysts to choose
different tools according to the nature of the problem. We
want to suggest the MohammadiGhazanfari (M-G) model
for dealing with the soft problem. This model consists of two
phases. The first phase is the appreciation and analysis of the
problem. In this phase, the composition of the CRT or EC
with CLD is used for the appreciation and analysis of the
problem. The second phase includes the assessment and
Table 4.

4.1

M-B frameworks for the subsidized milk industry

According to the subsidized milk discussions, it can be

stated that the problem in personal domain includes

Mingers Brocklesby framework for mapping methodologies EC.

Phases of intervention

Problem domain

Appreciation of . . .

Analysis of . . .

Assessment of . . .

Action to . . .

Social

Social practices,
power relations
Individuals beliefs,
meanings, emotions
Physical
circumstances

Distortions, conflicts
of interest
Different perceptions
and Weltanschauung
Underlying
causal structure

Ways of challenging and

altering power structures
Alternative conceptualizations
and constructions
Alternative physical and
structural arrangements

Generate empowerment
and enlightenment
Generate accommodations
and consensus
Select and implement
best alternative

Personal
Material

Table 5.

Mingers Brocklesby framework for mapping methodologies CLD.

Phases of intervention

Problem domain

Appreciation of . . .

Analysis of . . .

Assessment of . . .

Action to . . .

Social

Social practices,
power relations
Individuals beliefs,
meanings, emotions
Physical
circumstances

Distortions, conflicts
of interest
Different perceptions and
Weltanschauung
Underlying causal
structure

Ways of challenging and

altering power structures
Alternative conceptualizations
and constructions
Alternative physical and
structural arrangements

Generate empowerment
and enlightenment
Generate accommodations
and consensus
Select and implement
best alternative

Personal
Material

H. Mohammadi et al.
System analyser or
Decision maker

Determination of
problem domain

Determination of phases
of intervention

yes
System Dynamics

Do find the problem

solution with one of the SD or
TOCTPs approach?

Phases of interventtion:
Appreciation of ...
Analysis of ...
yes
Theory of constraints
Thinking process

Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 15:35 26 January 2015

NO
Appreciation of
problem

Causal Loop
Diagrams

Use the TOCTPs and SD combinited

approach for soft problem
CRT,EC

Stock and flow

Model

Simulation

FRT,NBR
If youre seeking policy
that the consequences have
been predicted by SD

If youre Seeking solutions

that have extracted of
creative ideas by TOCTPs

assessment
of policies

Select the best

policy by SD

PRT,TrT

Phases of interventtion:
Assessment of ...
Action of ...

Comparison final solutions

and policies regard
to political,economical and social
condition and organization environment

Select the best soution(s)o

policy in SD and TOCTPs
combinated approach

Figure 1.

Proposed M-G model for developing basic solutions in the TOCTP/SD combined approach.

individual health and the problem in the social domain

includes social health, productivity, efficiency, employment, etc. (Table 6).
There are two important issues about the appreciation
and analysis of the problem. First, the roots of conflict in
problems will be detected. Second, the variables and their
impact on each other will be identified in order to gain a
better understanding of the problem. In the following, two
steps are performed by the EC and CLD tools.

reciprocal exclusive actions. Using EC, an attempt at

discovery not only illustrates the dilemma but also makes
appreciation better in its underpinning assumptions, so that
one search can recognize breakthrough actions that can
solve the initial complicated situation. Underlying most
complicated situations is a conflict or dilemma. In the
illustration captured as Figure 2, we depict the dilemma of
whether or not to keep subsidizing milk from the
perspectives of the supporters and the opponents.

4.1.1 Applying TOC the evaporating cloud (EC)

We will demonstrate how EC can frame the natural
conflict in this dilemma between credible alternatives and

4.1.2 Applying SDs CLD

Perhaps it could be said that the main phase of using a
system dynamics approach attempts to understand and

Theory of constraints/system dynamics

Table 6.

Mingers Brocklesby framework for mapping methodologies in the subsidized milk industry.
Phases of intervention

Problem domain

Appreciation of . . .

Analysis of . . .

Assessment of . . .

Action to . . .

Social

Material

Social practices,
power relations
Individuals beliefs,
meanings, emotions
Physical circumstances

Distortions, conflicts
of interest
Different perceptions
and Weltanschauung
Underlying causal structure

Ways of challenging and

altering power structures
Alternative conceptualizations
and constructions
Alternative physical and
structural arrangements

Generate empowerment
and enlightenment
Generate accommodations
and consensus
Select and implement
best alternative

Tools

EC/CLD

EC/CLD

Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 15:35 26 January 2015

Personal

identify the feedback loops of the system under study. One

of the methods used for this is drawing a causal loop
diagram. This diagram illustrates relationships that are
difficult to describe verbally because normal language
presents interrelations as linear cause-and-effect chains,
while the diagram shows that the actual system has
circular chains of cause and effect. Figure 3 shows the
CLD for the subsidized milk industry.
5.

Conclusion

Quantitative modeling to deal with soft problems such as

managerial policies and organizational behavior have

Reduce the cost of health care people

and government which is caused by
the lack of milk consumption
Increasing employment opportunities
especially in rural and small urban

faced a challenge. This article has discussed multimethodology approaches to dealing with soft problems.
In particular, the combination of TOC with SD has been
discussed and then the M-G model was proposed. This
model consists of two phases. The first phase is the
appreciation and analysis of the problem. The second
phase includes the assessment and evaluation of actions.
The subsidized milk industry was used to describe the first
phase of the model. Usually, governments try to increase
milk consumption using financial assistance. In Iran,
theoretical differences have grown up concerning the
payment or non-payment of milk subsidies. So we have
studied this conflict by applying TOC using evaporating

Increase the milk supply and

public access
People are more willing to
consume the cheaper milk

Increasing labor productivity index

and positive effects on the economy
Enhance personal and social health

Increase in per capita

consumption and investmetnt
and production in milk
industry
Save finacial resources and
improve economic idicators

Conflict
Manage costs,improve
productivity,eliminate
irregularities and long lines

Fertility of resources, including human

resources,work spaces and warehouses
Eliminating milk subsidies reduce
violence and long lines to buy milk

Figure 2.

Milk subsidies not

be eliminated

Evaporating clouds of the subsidized milk industry.

Milk subsidies not

be eliminated

Increasing competitiveness and the use of new

technologies in the supply,production and
distribution of dairy products
Dispatching all the milk produced to the market)lack
of maintenance (and Balancing the market

H. Mohammadi et al.
Raw milk
production

The cost of
livestock feeds

Employment oportunities
and prevent migration

Payment of subsidies of
producers and consumers

Financial resources
allocated to milk

Financial resources

The cost of raw

milk production
Subsidized Milk
supply

Delinquency by
manufacturers, distuibutors,
retailers

Subsidized Milk price

The loss of
resources allocated
to milk

The mortality
rate

Population
Public Access

Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 15:35 26 January 2015

Set standards for

Subsidized milk

Subsidized
Milk quality

Demand for
Subsidized milk
Birth rate

Awareness of the
benefits of milk
consumption
Advertising in the mass
media (TV and radio,
newspapers, etc.)
Per capita
consumption of milk

Distribution of Subsidized
milk in schools

Figure 3.

Government
health expenses

Family
Awareness

People health
cists

Diseases caused by lack

of milk consumption

Level of people and

society health

Labor productivity

Causal loop diagram for the subsidized milk industry.

clouds (EC). The SDs CLD was used to identify the

variables and their impact on each other in order to gain a
better understanding of the problem. Applying these tools
utilized the advantages of both methods.
References
Blackstone, J. H. (2001). Theory of constraints A status report.
International Journal of Production Research, 39,
1053 1080.
Chaudhari, H. V., & Mukhopadhyay, S. K. (2003). Application of
theory of constraints in an integrated poultry industry.
International Journal of Production Research, 41, 799 817.
Chou, Y.-C., Lu, C. -H., & Tang, Y. -Y. (2012). Identifying
inventory problems in the aerospace industry using the
theory of constraints. International Journal of Production
Research, 50, 4686 4698.
Dalci, I., & Kosan, L. (2012). Theory of constraints thinkingprocess tools facilitate goal achievement for hotel management: A case study of improving customer satisfaction.
Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 21,
541 568.
Davies, J., Mabin, V. J., & Balderstone, S. J. (2005). The theory
of constraints: A methodology apart? A comparison with
selected OR/MS methodologies. Omega, 33, 506 524.
Davies, J., Mabin, V. J., & Cox, J. F. (2004). The theory of
constraints and system dynamics: A suitable case for multimethodology. Proceedings of the system dynamics international conference. Oxford, UK.
Dettmer, H. W. (1997). Goldratts theory of constraints:
A systems approach to continuous improvement. ASQ
Quality Press.

Fekri, K., Shafiabady, A., Nooranipour, R., & Ahghar, G. (2012).

Determine and compare effectiveness of entrepreneurship
education based on multi-axial model and theory of
constraints and compromises on learning entrepreneurship
skills. Paper presented at the international conference on
education and educational psychology (ICEEPSY 2012),
Antalya, Turkey, 2 5 October 2012. Procedia Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 69, 566 570. Retrieved from http://dx.
doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.561
Forrester, J. W. (1961). Industrial dynamics Vol. 2. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Goldratt, E. M. (1990). What is this thing called theory of
constraints and how should it be implemented? Croton-onHudson, NY: North River Press.
Goldratt, E. M., & Cox, J. (1984). The goal: Excellence in
manufacturing Vol. 1. Croton-on-Hudson, NY: North River
Press.
Gupta, M. (2003). Constraints management recent advances
and practices. International Journal of Production Research,
41, 647 659.
Gupta, M., & Snyder, D. (2009). Comparing TOC with MRP and
JIT: A literature review. International Journal of Production
Research, 47, 3705 3739.
Kim, S., Mabin, V. J., & Davies, J. (2008). The theory of
constraints thinking processes: Retrospect and prospect.
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 28, 155 184.
Lacerda, D., Cassel, R., & Rodrigues, R. (2010). Service process
analysis using process engineering and the theory of
constraints thinking process. Business Process Management
Journal, 16, 264 281.
Latorre, V., Roberts, M., & Riley, M. J. (2010). Development of a
systems dynamics framework for KPIs to assist project

Downloaded by [University of Saskatchewan Library] at 15:35 26 January 2015

Theory of constraints/system dynamics

managers decision making processes. Revista de la
Construccion, 9, 39 49.
Taylor, Lloyd J., & Thomas, E. (2008). Applying Goldratts
thinking process and the theory of constraints to the
invoicing system of an oil and gas engineering consulting
firm. Performance Improvement, 47, 26 34.
Mabin, V. J., Davies, J., & Cox, J. F. (2006). Using the theory of
constraints thinking processes to complement system
dynamics causal loop diagrams in developing fundamental
solutions. International Transactions in Operational
Research, 13, 33 57.
Mingers, J. (1997a). Multiparadigm multi-methodology.
In J. Mingers & A. Gill (Eds.), Multi methodology: Theory
and practice of combining management science methodologies (pp. 1 20). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Mingers, J. (1997b). Towards critical pluralism. In J. Mingers &
A. Gill (Eds.), Multi methodology: Theory and practice of
combining
management
science
methodologies
(pp. 407 440). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Mingers, J. (2000). Variety is the spice of life: Combining soft
and hard OR/MS methods. International Transactions in
Operational Research, 7, 673 691.
Mingers, J. (2003). A classification of the philosophical
assumptions of management science methods. Journal of
the Operational Research Society, 54, 559 570.
Mingers, J., & Brocklesby, J. (1997). Multimethodology:
Towards a framework for mixing methodologies. Omega,
25, 489 509.
Naor, M., Bernardes, E. S., & Coman, A. (2013). Theory of
constraints: Is it a theory and a good one? International
Journal of Production Research, 51, 542 554.
Nuhoglu, H. (2010). The effect of the system dynamics approach
on understanding causal relationship skills in science
education. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2,
3614 3618. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbsp
ro.2010.03.561
Politou, A., & Georgiadis, P. (2008). Production planning and
control in flow shop operations using drum buffer rope
methodology: A system dynamics approach. Proceedings of
the 26th international conference of the System Dynamics
Society (pp. 1 18). Athens.
Rahman, S. (1998). Theory of constraints: A review of the
philosophy and its applications. International Journal of
Operations & Production Management, 18, 336355.
Reid, R. A. (2007). Applying the TOC five-step focusing process
in the service sector: A banking subsystem. Managing
Service Quality, 17, 209 234.
Reid, R. A., & Cormier, J. (2003). Applying the TOC TP: A case
study in the service sector. Managing Service Quality, 13,
349 369.
Reid, R. A., & Koljonen, E. L. (1999). Validating a
manufacturing paradigm: A system dynamics modeling
approach. Proceedings of the 31st conference on Winter
simulation: Simulation a bridge to the future (Vol. 1,

pp. 759 765). ACM: Pointe Hilton Squaw Peak Resort

Phoenix, AZ, U.S.A. 5 8 December 1999.
Ritson, N., & Waterfield, N. (2005). Managing change: The
theory of constraints in the mental health service. Strategic
Change, 14, 449458.
Sadat, S. (2009). Theory of constraints for publicly funded health
systems. (Ph.D. dissertation). University of Toronto, Canada.
Scheinkopf, L. J. (1999). Thinking for a change: Putting
the TOC thinking processes to use. printed in USA:
CRC Press. http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&
id=pinJA4-spBAC&oi=fnd&pg=PR21&dq=Goldratts+
theory+of+constraints:+a+systems+approach+to+continu
ous+improvement.+%09ASQ+Quality+Press.+&ots=_u
FQfpP-Mn&sig=SM4lZcHYPA331Jq0Wu
WwZUQzhKc#v=onepage&q=Goldratts%20theory%20of
%20constraints%3A%20a%20systems%20approach%20to
%20continuous%20improvement.%20%09ASQ%20Qual
ity%20Press.&f=false
Scoggin, J. M., Segelhorst, R. J., & Reid, R. A. (2003). Applying
the TOC thinking process in manufacturing: A case study.
International Journal of Production Research, 41, 767 797.
Smith, D. (2000). The measurement nightmare: How the theory
of constraints can resolve conflicting strategies, policies, and
measures. printed in USA: CRC Press. http://www.amazon.
com/Thinking-Change-Processes-Constraints-Management/
dp/1574441019
Sterman, J. D., Forrester, J. W., Graham, A. K., & Senge, P. M.
(1983). An integrated approach to the economic long wave.
Paper read at the Long Waves, Depression, Innovation
Conference, Siena Florence, Italy. Sloan School of Management, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
Tsou, C. M. (2013). On the strategy of supply chain collaboration
based on dynamic inventory target level management:
A theory of constraint perspective. Applied Mathematical
Modelling, 37, 5204 5214.
Umble, M., Umble, E., & Murakami, S. (2006). Implementing
theory of constraints in a traditional Japanese manufacturing
environment: The case of Hitachi Tool Engineering.
International Journal of Production Research, 44,
1863 1880.
Walker, E. D. II, & Cox, J. F. III (2006). Addressing ill-structured
problems using Goldratts thinking processes: A white collar
example. Management Decision, 44, 137 154.
Watson, K. J., Blackstone, J. H., & Gardiner, S. C. (2007). The
evolution of a management philosophy: The theory of
constraints. Journal of Operations Management, 25,
387 402.
Wixson, J. R., & Mills, J. I. (2003). A system dynamics view
of the theory of constraints. Proceedings of the 21st
international conference of the System Dynamics Society.
New York. 20 24 July 2003. http://wvasolutions.com/TOC.
pdf
Zhao, J., Feng, Z., Chu, F., & Ma, N. (2014). Advanced theory of
constraint and motion analysis for robot mechanisms.
Oxford: Academic Press.