Well we knew it was backwards already. Like I said, E2E won't work and will feel wrong until they change the DC's.
The eaches model should not be used under the conditions you explained, but these do not quite match up with what Target is facing. They are not using break down as a standard necessarily, but doing so in many of the areas where there is a problem with capacities on the floor and large casepack quantities. I can tell you from a store that takes 7 RDC trailers/week that many of my trucks are trash. I get 2-4 vehicles of HBA cases as push, and 1-2 full flats of backstock every truck. That is a 50% return to the stockroom (and double touch) of the cases currently, and that is with an already heavy repack structure. I get 10-12 vehicles of home/plastics/decor and 3-4 vehicles go to the backroom from push. Remember as well that this is not counting my truck backstock that is already pulling off cases (so HBA has one full pallet of truck backstock per truck as well). I understand where some of these efficiency metrics are coming from, but the amount of double work on the back end with backstock is outrageous. I (in some areas) have to touch the cases multiple more times before it reaches its final destination because Target is unable to flexibly fulfill the required outcome.
There lies the problem my friend. E2E is not going to solve those excessive inventory receipts. Whether it's the current method or E2E, your going to get a 53' trailer filled with things you need and don't need until such time that Spot looks at things bilaterally.
We operate under a unilateral process and apparently will continue to do so in the foreseeable future. In other words, we cannot prevent nor stop such shipments when necessary. Our end goals are not the same throughout the process. That does not appear to be changing either.
E2E is a bilateral process. It does not work successfully unilaterally from what I researched. This is one of the reasons we are experiencing problems with it. It's not just how the trucks are loaded, but it's the contents of the truck. You receive only what you need and nothing else. Deviation is not an element of the E2E process unless it is approved by the recipient prior to shipment. This allows the ability to address the exception created by the deviation. All exceptions are recorded and addressed as part of the ongoing continuous improvement process.
😕 I think Spot was sleeping when this was being discussed.
Back to your issue. TAT (turn around time) should not be an issue considering your store shipment frequencies. Given Spot's system and setup, it should literally be truck to shelf. Volume could be offset easily with an increase in PIPO shipments for those qualifying DPCI's requiring increased frequencies.
You will have some backstock. It comes with the territory.
That being said, there is nothing out there, nor through my personal experiences (tier 1 JIT to retail) that justify not utilizing case quantities where ever possible. Minneapolis has become complacent or lazing in that regards. We're all experiencing that at the store level.
Don't get me wrong, I see merits in E2E, but I don't see it as a solution to our problem of inventory control. There are other reasons lurking out there that's causing shortages/overages. While some may be justifiable, most are not given our system. Spot failed to address this issue years ago when life was good. That's obvious.
We currently have the ability to control our inventory while taking in consideration all of the other aspects of the business like end of season, transition periods, and other merchandise sets. We're just not willing to undertake the discipline to do such.