Simulation and Results: To show the effect of Variety on the process we will do 05

simulation cases. The whole process consists of 3 activities (Fig 02) with all the
activities taking same process time. In all the cases processing speed is much greater
than our customer arrival time (6 patients per hour vs 5 patients per hour)

Base Case: The process provides only one type of service which pass through 3
activities. The service time mean is 10 minutes per activity (exponential). The rate of
incoming of patient is 12 minutes (exponential) with only standard service i.e. no variety
of service with 01 Server per activity.
Case 1: The process provides two type of service which pass through 3 activities. The
service/process time mean is 10 minutes each with probability distribution of 0.5 & 0.5
per activity (exponential). The rate of incoming of patient is 12 minutes (exponential).
The process is with variety of service with 01 Server per activity
Case 2: This case has all the attributes of case 1 but instead of one server per activity it
has Two servers per activity. This model shows effect of increase in capacity.
Case 3: This case has all the attributes of case 2 but in place of probability of 50%
chance for both type of process. This case has probability of 90% for patients having
processing time of 10 minutes and 10% of patients that require other service with mean
of 10 minutes in processing.
Case 4: This case has all the attributes of case 3 but in now the probability one service
with mean processing time of 10min is 10% while probability of second service with
mean average time of 12 min is 90%.
Output Average Average Average Average idle Average Total time
Utilization Length Wait Time Time Block time in system
Base case 59 0.53 1 12.54 0.24 0.23 37.62
Case 1 49 0.45 0.73 14.74 0.27 0.28 44.22
Case 2 93 0.33 0.72 7.62 0.33 0.63 22.86
Case 3 95 0.07 0.15 1.56 0.92 0 4.6
Case 4 81 0.56 1.33 15.75 0.33 0.10 47.25

Explanation of Result: From the above result we can deduce that with increase in
variety of service the average wait time, total time in process increases and the number
of customer/patient processed are reduced (base case vs case 1) as system is more
often blocked or idle due to interconnectedness of system and variability in customer
demand and processing.
In case 2 as we have doubled our capacity as a result the average wait time is reduced
drastically and the output is just doubled but we also see that that there is rise in
average blocked and idle time this is because now system process much faster speed
and as there is no inventory in between the activities there will be more cases when one
of the process is starved in want of item or will be sitting idle as there is no place to
keep item as inventory and as the next subsequent activity is still in process the system
sits idle.

In case 3 we have less variability than case 2 as one of the service is 90% of the time
as compared to 50% of the time in case 2 as such this results in high output, however,
as we have excess capacity the system sits idle for 92% of the time. The average wait
time and total time in process is reduced which increases service quality but at the cost
of system idleness as the resources are not fully utilized. This is the problem one has to
address in service sector to maintain the balance between capacity addition and
anticipated demand in order to maintain healthy customer satisfaction vis a vis less
resource wastage. The cost of adding capacity should be less than the cost of waiting
line to the company/hospital.

In case 4 we have reduced the variability but the process time is also increased for 90%
of the cases as such patients will take more time in the total process and the output is
less as compared to case 3. The average wait time and total time in process has
increased as the mean processing time is more.