Abstract
Every company that has employees working on irregular schedules must deal with the difficult and time consuming problem of creating feasible schedules for the employees. We introduce an algorithm that takes a partial schedule created by requests from employees and creates feasible schedule where most of the employee’s requests are unchanged, while still making sure that rules and regulations are not violated. The algorithm is based on independent modules, which can be executed in any order, and each module tries to emulate some action taken by a staff manager.
Our goal is to create a transparent and fair system that creates feasible schedules of high quality, but also a system where the employees can get an explanation and justification for every change that the algorithm makes to the employee requests. By emulating the actions of staff managers, the algorithm is easily understood by staff managers and, using detailed logs of any action, make any decision easy to explain to the employees.
We will present the algorithm and show results from four real world companies and institutions. The results show that a simple module based heuristic can get good results and create fair and feasible schedules that encourage employees to participate in the self-scheduling process.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ahmad, J., Yamamoto, M., & Ohuchi, A. (2000). Evolutionary algorithms for nurse scheduling problem. In Proceedings of CEC00 (pp. 196–203). San Diego
Aickelin, U., & Dowsland, K. (2000). Exploiting problem structure in a genetic algorithm approach to a nurse rostering problem. Journal of Scheduling, 3(3), 139–153.
Alsheddy, A., & Edward, T. (2011). Empowerment scheduling for a field workforce. Journal of Scheduling, 14(6), 639–654. doi:10.1007/s10951-011-0232-2
Al-Yakoob, S. M., & Sherali, H. D. (2008). A column generation approach for an employee scheduling problem with multiple shifts and work locations. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 59(1), 34–43.
Bard, J. F., & Purnomo, H. W. (2005). Preference scheduling for nurses using column generation. European Journal of Operational Research, 164, 510–534.
Brusco, M. J., & Jacobs, L. W. (1995). Cost analysis of alternative formulations for personnel scheduling in continuously operating organisations. European Journal of Operational Research, 86, 249–261.
Burke, E. K., De Causmaecker, P., & Vanden Berghe, G. (1999). A hybrid tabu search algorithm for the nurse rostering problem. In LNCS: Vol. 1585. SEAL’98 (pp. 187–194).
Burke, E. K., Cowling, P., De Causmaecker, P., & Vanden Berghe, G. (2001). A memetic approach to the nurse rostering problem. Simulated Evolution and Learning, 15(3), 199–214. Applied Intelligence special issue.
Burke, E., De Causmaecker, P., Petrovic, S., & Vanden Berghe, G. (2004a). Variable neighborhood search for nurse rostering problems. In M. G. C. Resende, J. P. de Sousa, & A. Viana (Eds.), Applied Optimization: Vol. 86. Metaheuristics (pp. 153–172). Norwell: Kluwer Academic.
Burke, E. K., De Causmaecker, P., Vanden Berghe, G. & Van Landeghem, H. (2004b). The state of the art of nurse rostering. Journal of Scheduling, 7, 441–499.
De Causmaecker, P., & Vanden Berghe, G. (2011a). Towards a reference model for timetabling and rostering. Annals of Operations Research. doi:10.1007/s10479-010-0721-2
De Causmaecker, P., & Vanden Berghe, G. (2011b). A categorisation of nurse rostering problems. Journal of Scheduling, 14, 3–16.
De Causmaecker, P., Demeester, P., & Vanden Berghe, G. (2002a). Relaxation of coverage constraints in hospital personnel rostering. In Proceedings of the 4th international conference on practice and theory of automated timetabling (pp. 187–206).
De Causmaecker, P., Demeester, P., Lu, Y., & Vanden Berghe, G. (2002b). Agent technology for timetabling. In Proceedings of the 4th international conference on practice and theory of automated timetabling (pp. 215–220).
Dowsland, K. (1998). Nurse scheduling with tabu search and strategic oscillation. European Journal of Operations Research, 106, 393–407.
Easton, F., & Mansour, N. (1993). A distributed genetic algorithm for employee staffing and scheduling problems. In Conference on genetic algorithms (pp. 360–367). San Mateo: Morgan Kaufmann.
Ernst, A. T., Jiang, H., Krishnamoorthy, M., Owens, B., & Sier, D. (2004). An annotated bibliography of personnel scheduling and rostering. Annals of Operations Research, 127, 21–144.
Ernst, A. T., Jiang, H., Krishnamoorthy, M., & Sier, D. (2004). Timetabling and rostering. European Journal of Operational Research, 153(1), 3–27.
Howell, J. P. (1966). Cyclical scheduling of nursing personnel. Hospitals, 40(2), 77–85.
Hung, R. (1992). Improving productivity and quality through workforce scheduling. Industrial Management, 34, 6.
Jeroen, B., & Demeulemeester, E. (2007). On the trade-off between staff-decomposed and activity-decomposed column generation for a staff scheduling problem. Annals of Operations Research, 155(1), 143–166.
Petrovic, S., Beddoe, G., & Vanden Berghe, G. (2002). Storing and adapting repair experiences in employee rostering. In LNCS: Vol. 2740. Selected papers from PATAT (pp. 149–166). Berlin: Springer.
Tanomaru, J. (1995). Staff scheduling by a genetic algorithm with heuristic operators. In Proceedings of CEC95 (pp. 456–461).
van der Veen, E., & Veltman, B. (2009). Rostering from staffing levels: a branch-and-price approach. In Proceedings of the 35th international conference on operational research applied to health services (ORAHS) (pp. 1–10).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Work done in collaboration with Vaktaskipan ehf.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ásgeirsson, E.I. Bridging the gap between self schedules and feasible schedules in staff scheduling. Ann Oper Res 218, 51–69 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-012-1060-2
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-012-1060-2