The Supply Chain Information Technology blog

A few weeks ago on the SCIT Perspectives Blog David Meyers asked the question, "Where do you pick from when all the low hanging fruit is gone?"

This question stems from a WMS upgrade project that David is involved with which is actively seeking to reduce costs even though the operation is already running relatively lean. One potential area under consideration is new technologies – including Voice picking.

Having followed Voice Recognition for years, I believe it is a natural candidate for many WMS upgrade and implementation projects. Its hands-free, heads-up user interface gives it a definite edge over RF terminals. And I appreciate the value it can bring to other activities like cycle counting, replenishments, and putaways.

I’m not saying that it is a fit for every operation and every activity. But I believe it is worthy of becoming a mainstream data collection technology for the warehouse floor.

For mainstream technology, functional fit and usability are not the only criteria – integration and cost play a critical role. The integration landscape has matured with most top-tier and many mid-tier WMS vendors offering direct interfaces to Voice solutions.

As I am a voice technology consultant, I pointed out in a recent Tompkins white paper, Voice-Enabling Your SAP Warehouse, SAP WM/EWM users have a variety of approaches available for integrating Voice within their facilities. There are more application providers and hardware vendors chasing the Voice marketplace. More choice drives lower cost points making the technology even more attractive.

So is Voice ready for prime time? I definitely think so.

Is it there yet? I’m not so sure.

Based on what I hear and see, more and more DC operations are actively pursuing or considering implementing Voice.

However, I still hear a lot of folks saying that they’ll get around to it but not right now. I also know of some enterprises that are pursuing a new WMS implementation or upgrade who view it as a Phase 2 or beyond consideration. So it still hasn’t reached the same acceptance level as RF.

Some of this hesitation is due to critical mass. People feel more comfortable with the technology when they personally know other sites that employ it.

Also, I think some WMS vendors and integrators contribute to this condition. They may actively pitch Voice during the sales cycle. But their implementation folks may view it as another set of tasks on a project plan that is already overcrowded.

Anyone who has been involved in a WMS implementation can appreciate that sometimes it is best to walk on Day 1 and leave the running for Day 2 or beyond. However, I can’t point to any mid-to-large size DC implementing a new WMS that is waiting for Phase 2 or 3 to roll out RF.

Waiting until Day 2 or beyond may not be the conservative bet anymore. If the technology is mature enough to be mainstream, then waiting just leaves the benefits – which can be considerable – to a vague future date.

Installing Voice on Day 2 in an operation that went live, with RF or paper, can be more costly and time consuming than doing it in the original implementation.

Once again, I’m not saying Voice is right for every operation. It may even make sense to wait rather than include it in any specific implementation or upgrade plan. But I think it deserves the same level of Day 1 consideration given to RF, pick-to-light and other commonly employed warehouse management systems and technologies.

Am I overly optimistic in my assessment? Do you think Voice is ready for prime time? If not, what do you see as the barriers?

--Tom

Tags:

In many of the companies I deal with, the Global Trade Management (GTM) function is placed in the hands of either a small, very qualified team or in the hands of a trusted trading partner: the freight forwarder.

These parties are typically highly qualified to deal in the labyrinth of global logistics. However, the placement and structure of these groups, their relationship to supply chain effectiveness, and the specialized technology tools with limited meaningful integration often don’t work in concert with the overall needs of right product, right place, right time, right cost.

For many firms, now is the right time to evaluate global trade capabilities and achieve a competitive edge. In some cases, upon evaluation, making use of existing capabilities with a re-engineered integration and visibility model is the correct path forward.

More frequently, when this evaluation is coupled with a review of current software solutions, a new platform for GTM is the more effective way to proceed.

Global trade management technology has come a long way in the last few years. Several stable and committed solution providers have delivered on a globally connected vision of the supply chain, offering robust applications that rein in control of the global supply chain and provide broad accessibility.

Their focus has been on meeting the demands of constantly evolving trade regulations while also maintaining a commitment to improving trade financial management and providing meaningful visibility.

Because many of the solutions have their roots in Software-as-a-Service (SaaS), their maturity in stabilizing a low cost of ownership and in handling broader systems integration needs is greater than most other areas of supply chain information technology.

Look for solutions that offer the following:

Export and Import Compliance

Export and Import Classification

Trade Document Generation

Lead Time Assessment and Reduction

Reduction in Duties Paid and Non-compliance

Landed Cost/Origin Management and What-if Assessment

Trade Finance

Supplier Collaboration

Robust Integration with Accounting, ERP and SCM systems

The barrier to deploying GTM solutions is being lowered every day, and the path that yields substantial results continues to become clearer. Read the latest paper from Tompkins (and co-authored by yours truly) on Global Trade Management Technology to explore this topic further, and, as always, I’m interested in your thoughts.

- Matt

Photo credit: Mishel Churkin

Tags:

It’s no secret that Tompkins Associates is a proponent of warehouse control systems. In fact, we have our own WCS that we provide to our integration clients: Tompkins Warehouse Control System.

I bring this up, because a recent client meeting reminded me of how a WCS can open up visibility into warehouse operations. This particular client is using our WCS to implement a multi-phase material handling equipment upgrade. The warehouse management systems' (WMS) interface to the WCS are expected to remain fixed while the MHE changes.

During the meeting, we finished the interface review and moved into a discussion of our operational data screens. As I finished a review of our standard screens, I asked the client team for input on any custom screens or reports that they might need to help them manage the DC. After a period of silence, they answered, "We will have to get back to you on that, since our current controls don’t provide us any data!"

It was a light-bulb-over-the-head, paradigm-shifting moment. Our client team realized that they now had the opportunity to "know what they didn’t know" (i.e., get visibility into productivity and throughput data to help them identify trouble spots and optimize their warehousing and distribution operations).

A WCS provides two important advantages over a traditional WMS/MHE controls integration:

The first advantage is that it hides the complexity of MHE interface details from the WMS. In essence, the WCS provides a uniform interface of data items to the WMS while dealing with the physical interface to the MHE. This was the feature that drove our client to select a WCS for their multi-phase warehouse upgrade program.

The second advantage of a WCS is that it provides real-time data to allow users to manage their MHE and warehouse operations. Although this feature can be provided by traditional controls, it is often overlooked. This operational data visibility is a powerful advantage to any organization (like our client in the story above) that has been struggling with an older low-to-zero information MHE controls system.

Tompkins has plenty of good company in regards to touting the advantage of using warehouse control systems in modern DCs. I recently came across an article that shows how Ikea uses a WCS to support uniform practices across its network of DCs. The article, linked here (http://logisticsviewpoints.com/2009/09/03/ikea-overcomes-warehouse-control-systems-islands-of-automation/), is worth reading for a complementary perspective on the topic.

The advantages of a WCS feed into a topic that is the essence of this blog: the topic of supply chain visibility. Any DC is an important link in the data chain that comprises supply chain visibility (or is in fact the origination point of the supply chain).

Warehouse Control Systems are an important tool not only to manage the DC, but to link the data within the DC to the overall supply-chain IT infrastructure. A well-implemented WCS begins supply chain visibility right in your own DC.

-- Paul

Tags: wms, mhe, integration

A few posts back, I asked, "Where is that last dime?"

Now, as I’m starting a new WMS upgrade / implementation project, the question is even more timely and critical to the success of this particular project.

So here’s the background:

This company has been using one of the more well-known "Best of Breed" (or BoB) SCM software packages (see Tom’s recent post on ERP vs. BoB) since the early 2000s.

The package has been highly modified over the past several years to accommodate incremental improvements in business processes. During this time, the company also added many reports to assist in four wall DC visibility.

Fortunately, since the original implementation, the software supplier has taken great strides in increasing the core functionality of its WMS so that some (hopefully many) of the enhancements and additional reports may be able to be retired.

With that said, why is it such a challenge to continue to find other ways to lower the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)?

Also, did I mention that this company outsources its fulfillment to a logistics service provider?

To begin with, these guys are well known for operating on very slim margins. And, they are already using engineered labor standards and performance incentives, which drive costs down and increase service levels. Not a very target-rich environment – all of the low hanging fruit has already been picked.

Here is the plan:

This is not a "find and replace" type WMS upgrade. There is very heavy integration with other systems (ERP, TMS, LMS) and homegrown reporting tools. So I intend to carefully weigh the integration alternatives, which include:

• Decoupling external systems – What can be brought into the core application and what additional integration (or re-integration) may be eliminated, along with the staff required to support those external solutions?
• Automation of reports, queries, and other output files – What business critical reports require human intervention or manipulation and can they be automated?
• New technology integration – Are there opportunities where the integration of new supply chain information technologies (e.g., voice picking, etc.) can provide a payback with either improved service level, inventory accuracy, or reduction in labor cost?
• Host order profile – Are there opportunities to work with customers to change order line quantities prior to download to the WMS that could result in more efficient picking (e.g., round up/round down to layer quantities to reduce less efficient case picking)?

Where else can I look? I’d like to know.

-- David Meyers

Photo credit: wildxplorer

Tags: wms, total cost of ownership