![]() |
|
||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
05/10/10
In life and in business there are distinctions. A distinction suggests the perception of dissimilarity, as the result of analysis and discrimination. For example, when a carefully made distinction is made between two material handling designs for the same business a difference may refer only to the conditions of being dissimilar, for example the difference between a tilt tray sorter and a cross belt sorter. A distinction in life and business is the concept of “right versus wrong” versus “what works for some does not work for others.” You may be asking where the author is coming from. There is difference of opinion in the material handling and industrial engineering consulting arena as to how to design a distribution center. Who is most qualified and who can produce the best solution for a client? In this example, let's assume that the distribution center is a 450,000 square foot facility that will be used to distribute merchandise to 100 retail stores. The prospective client is considering using an industrial engineering consulting firm that is focused on a solution design that is unbiased versus the use of a Material Handling Integrator (MHI) whose livelihood is based upon selling and installing equipment. Note, the distinction is not to be righteous (right versus wrong) but “what works” for the client versus “what does not work.” Remember a distinction suggests the perception of dissimilarities as the result of analysis and discrimination. Let's explore the approach and differences between an unbiased industrial engineering consulting firm and a material handing integrator. The approach and methods by the two parties is based upon the end goal. Yes, both parties will explain to the client that their perspective solutions have the client's best interest in mind, however we will look at the metrics used by each party to determine the best solution for a client. The metric that is predominantly used by both independent consulting firms and material handling integrators to evaluate facility design solutions is Return on Investment (ROI). To paraphrase Elli Goldratt (Author of The Goal, Its Not Luck and the Hay Stack Syndrome) “metrics derive behavior, tell me how you measure me and I will behave accordingly, if you measure me illogically then expect me to behave illogically.” However there is a key distinction between independent consultants who have no affiliation with equipment vendors and who receive no compensation for their designs versus a material handling integrator who has the main objective of selling and installing equipment. A material handling integrator's metrics drive the entire organization (Sales Person, Design Consultant, Project Manager) to design solutions where by equipment (conveyor, racking, warehouse control system, sorters, ASRS, etc.) are the focus of the design. Many MHI vendors have started process improvement consulting practices, or facility design consulting practices, as part of their total services solution. It is the experience of the author that the MHI vendor will heavily discount, if not provide these services for free. Is it because the MHI vendor is a non-profit organization? Or is it because the MHI vendor would rather discount a solution design knowing that theforfeit cost of service can be overcome by selling equipment to the client where the profit is greater? The selling strategy is creative, but does it warrant the best and unbiased solution for the client? In addition, are alternative designs and conceptual solutions free of bias? If your depository of services offerings were pick-to-light, conveyor and racking,and you had no experience with WMS or voice technology would the MHI evaluate the latter? The goal of many MHI vendors is “to convert the facility design to metal” as stated by former facility design consultant. The design approach for both an independent consulting firm and MHI vendor are similar but there are key differences during the design life cycle that a buyer should be aware of. We will look at each one of major twelve (12) process steps and compare them between each party. STRATEGIC PLANNING Step 1. Establish A Project Team / Plan Objectives and Priorities Step 2. Establish Database * Planning horizon (five years, etc.) Step 3. Document Current Processes Step 4. Identify and Document Alternative Warehouse Strategic Plans Step 5. Evaluate Alternative Warehouse Strategic Plans Step 6. Specify the Plan DETAIL PLANNING The detail planning phase will not be performed by the MHI. There is no incentive for the MHI to locate the least expensive vendors or the equipment that best meets the needs of the customer. The MHI has fixed contracts with rack and conveyor vendors. Step 7. Establish Bidders List Step 8. Develop and Release Equipment and System Functional Specifications Provide functional equipment and system specifications with information such as the following: * General requirements Step 9. Vendor Interaction * Respond to questions during the bid process Step 10. Coordinate Site Visits Step 11. Evaluate and Select Vendors Step 12. Finalize Layout In life and in business there are distinctions. The distinction is not to be righteous (right versus wrong) but “what works” for client's versus “what does not work.” Remember a distinction suggests the perception of dissimilarities as the result of analysis and discrimination. The use of an independent consulting firm will allow a company to strategically plan and implement the most cost effective system where material flow and data flow are synchronized, ultimately producing the lowest total cost of ownership and positive ROI. Trackback address for this postTrackback URL (right click and copy shortcut/link location) No feedback yetComments are not allowed from anonymous visitors. |
|